A bet with anti-gunners

[rightwinger]

"Mass shootings" are the bogeyman because the Media makes them a big splash. Like an airliner crashing which kills many at one time, they enjoy promoting calls to "do something" yet airline travel is statistically one of the safest. Violent crime, including homicides committed by people with guns has been trending significantly down for decades, yet the media wants you to think we have to fear mass shootings more than any other activity. You want to remain significantly safer? Don't drive, or ride in a motor vehicle.

As human being we tend to overact with emotion, to "do something" even if we know it will be ineffective, or perhaps counterproductive.

More people get killed on a holiday weekend in Chicago than a mass shooting. The media is the most proficient brainwashing organization we have in this country. All they have to do is sensationalize any story, and the sheep flock to it.

Chicago has six million people, those schools have a little over a thousand
Why does it surprise you more get killed in Chicago?

Do you need to be educated on ratios?

Gotta laugh at this one

Prove me wrong on the murder rate in Chicago vs that High School

 

[Rustic]

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

Actually, we already did that.

We passed a Assault Weapon ban in the 1990's, and the number of mass shootings decreased. Then we let it lapse, and the number of mass shootings increased.

Lol

Na, That fucked up Clinton ban did nothing to lower violent behavior. So shut the fuck up

 

[francoHFW]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

So you think taking guns away from law abiding people, while criminals, crazies, and domestic abusers are armed..... is a brilliant solution?

Basically no one is for taking away any guns. It's about background checks and maybe Banning sales of assault rifles because nut job mental cases just love them.

 

[Rustic]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

Why have laws against having hand grenades, criminals have them in large numbers anyway. No actually they don't, because they are heavily regulated and laws are very strict on having them.

To cons it's just another inanimate object so why regulate hand grenades. They think people don't like them because they are 'scary looking'.

Cons your thought processes are so f'd up it's pathetic. Inanimate objects are how humans harm each other. Nuclear weapons are inanimate objects, surely you think they should be as legal to own as your 'harmless inanimate rifles'.

Or do you believe in controlling weapons and keeping them out of the hands of 'law abiding citizens'.

AR15s are harmless sporting rifles

 

[Flash]

You will never get the anti gun nuts to take your bet because they know as good as we do that no silly gun law will prevent crimes.

Their agenda is not public safety but to remove the threat to their agenda to make America a socialist shithole.

 

[Rustic]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

We have 300 million guns in our society

Regardless of what legislation you pass, you are not going to stop all 30,000 gun killings

But just because you can’t stop all killings, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try to stop any. With mass killings, the question is........why are we making it easier for them?

Suicides don’t count, cut your number by two thirds. dumbass

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Basically no one is for taking away any guns. It's about background checks and maybe Banning sales of assault rifles because nut job mental cases just love them

Background checks in exchange for no restrictions. Compromise or fuck off.

 

[Flash]

[QU

Basically no one is for taking away any guns..

Bullshit!!!!!! That is a fucking lie!

 

[SmokeALib]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

So you think taking guns away from law abiding people, while criminals, crazies, and domestic abusers are armed..... is a brilliant solution?

Basically no one is for taking away any guns. It's about background checks and maybe Banning sales of assault rifles because nut job mental cases just love them.

No assault rifle in Texas. A shotgun and a pistol. Kid took them from fathers house.
Perhaps it's a case of trickle down shit parenting.

 

[Flash]

Basically no one is for taking away any guns. It's about background checks and maybe Banning sales of assault rifles because nut job mental cases just love them

Background checks in exchange for no restrictions. Compromise or fuck off.

No background checks, no restrictions, no infringements.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You will never get the anti gun nuts to take your bet because they know as good as we do that no silly gun law will prevent crimes.

Their agenda is not public safety but to remove the threat to their agenda to make America a socialist shithole.

Of course they do. Some of them have even come out and said it. Now they moved the goalpost to "reducing" mass murders.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No background checks, no restrictions, no infringements.

That's just my attempt to show that they are unreasonable and just want to advance their communist agenda without resistance. None of them will agree to no restrictions.

 

[Rustic]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

So you think taking guns away from law abiding people, while criminals, crazies, and domestic abusers are armed..... is a brilliant solution?

Basically no one is for taking away any guns. It's about background checks and maybe Banning sales of assault rifles because nut job mental cases just love them.

Gun Control has never been about guns it’s always been about control. It’s silly little fuckers like yourselves, can’t help themselves in being control freaks...

 

[Coyote]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

So you think taking guns away from law abiding people, while criminals, crazies, and domestic abusers are armed..... is a brilliant solution?

What guns are being taken away? All guns?

 

[Rustic]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

So you think taking guns away from law abiding people, while criminals, crazies, and domestic abusers are armed..... is a brilliant solution?

What guns are being taken away? All guns?

Gun control has never been about guns, it’s all about control

 

[sealybobo]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

Nope. We aren’t talking about eliminating all mass murders just lowering the numbers.

Why are so many white men so angry?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

So you think taking guns away from law abiding people, while criminals, crazies, and domestic abusers are armed..... is a brilliant solution?

Basically no one is for taking away any guns. It's about background checks and maybe Banning sales of assault rifles because nut job mental cases just love them.

So the Texas shooter didn't use an AR, not even a semi-automatic, no bump stock or high capacity magazine.

Now if we made all these things illegal in the past, do you mean to tell me that the anti-gun left would not be calling for even more restrictions and regulations?

Of course they would, and of course Democrat politicians realize this. That's why they know that registration and banning assault rifles is just one step of a multistep process.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

Nope. We aren’t talking about eliminating all mass murders just lowering the numbers.

Why are so many white men so angry?

White men kind of get that way when you want to disarm them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

The NRA has nothing to do with it like they had nothing to do with one mass or school shooting. It's just you easily brainwashed people listen to your string pullers and actually believe the NRA is some sort of enemy.

They used to be all about gun safety. Now they are owned by gun manufacturers and will do anything to to sell more.

Well they have a long way to go to beat Obama, don't they?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Nope. We aren’t talking about eliminating all mass murders just lowering the numbers.

Why are so many white men so angry?

You want to decrease mass shooting deaths by MAYBE 3 people per year, maximum, while fucking over MILLIONS of people who would never harm anyone.

Still wondering why we're pissed, you racist motherfucker?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In the many discussions of mass murders, the dichotomy is that anti-gunners think they have the solution by restrictions on guns. The pro-gunners think that the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Very differing opinions indeed.

On the right, we believe that no matter what gun laws are created, the bad guys will always find access to firearms. The left? They believe criminals will obey any and all laws. On the right, we believe (as has been demonstrated in Europe) that even if we could make all guns illegal, that won't stop killers. On the left, they believe that if a mental person doesn't have access to guns, they will take up video games instead. Now to the bet..........

Let's say that the Congress agreed to create a law that read we will give anti-gunners anything they want to stop mass murders (name your poison). The bill would be set to expire in four years. Now if within that time, we see one more mass murder (guns or otherwise) the law would prohibit any further gun restriction legislation for 50 years. If within that time, the law stops all mass murders, we allow the left to keep it and even create more restrictions.

Would any anti-gunner be willing to make this wager?

The reason I ask is that I don't think for one minute the anti-gunners really believe any of their demands would stop mass murders, or even reduce them. It's just something to complain about because we are against their suggestions.

What is “anti gun” about by wanting children, crazies, criminals or domestic abuses to have weapons?

Maybe you should let go or the NRA misreprepesentatioms

The NRA has nothing to do with it like they had nothing to do with one mass or school shooting. It's just you easily brainwashed people listen to your string pullers and actually believe the NRA is some sort of enemy.

You mean like Soros?

We don't blame Soros for everything by the left. Every mass murder the left brings up the NRA when the NRA never promoted or accepted mass murders.