Attention, gun control supporters:

[RDD_1210]

What problem would that be?

Crime committed by "young black men between ages 15 and 25"

Dismantling the welfare state that aids and abets single parenthood and irresponsibility would go a long way.

Go on....

 

[RDD_1210]

Don't be such a tool, RD.
There is no "one reason" that blankets any problem we have.
But, there is a high crime black crime rate in the inner cities and part of that problem is the one parent raising children. It has been proven over and over again. That IS NOT a racist statement, because it IS a fact.

It's just that you guys will bend over backwards to point to anything and everything to explain why we have so much gun violence while refusing to look at the obvious culprit.

We have a lot of gun violence because we have a lot of guns. Those other factors certainly contribute to our problem but to pretend like the easy access and plethora of guns available in this country isn't part of the problem is dishonest at best.

Yet, you look at the areas where there is gun restrictions, and the crime rate rises.
You do not look at how guns have protected citizens from the perps. I have twice provided you with evidence, and on both occassions you have willfully ignored those posts, RDD.

I saw your "evidence". Not sure what point you were trying to make with your link.

 

[Meister]

It's just that you guys will bend over backwards to point to anything and everything to explain why we have so much gun violence while refusing to look at the obvious culprit.

We have a lot of gun violence because we have a lot of guns. Those other factors certainly contribute to our problem but to pretend like the easy access and plethora of guns available in this country isn't part of the problem is dishonest at best.

Yet, you look at the areas where there is gun restrictions, and the crime rate rises.
You do not look at how guns have protected citizens from the perps. I have twice provided you with evidence, and on both occassions you have willfully ignored those posts, RDD.

I saw your "evidence". Not sure what point you were trying to make with your link.

No doubt, sadly it wouldn't fit your mantra.

 

[The Rabbi]

Good thing no one is seriously proposing taking guns away from law abiding citizens. Next strawman.

Except that is the goal...

Limit the magazine size for law abiding citizens, while criminals ignore this law
Ban weapons by using the scary term 'assault rifle' or 'assault weapon'. while criminals ignore this law

Citizens should be allowed to own hand grenades, RPG's and their own tanks then, right? I mean, the criminals will just get them if they want them, so everyone should be able to get them right?

They actually already are allowed to own those things.
But that is another reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
Really if this is the best you can do you might want to consider surfing Youtube for cute vids about cats.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's just that you guys will bend over backwards to point to anything and everything to explain why we have so much gun violence while refusing to look at the obvious culprit.

We have a lot of gun violence because we have a lot of guns. Those other factors certainly contribute to our problem but to pretend like the easy access and plethora of guns available in this country isn't part of the problem is dishonest at best.

Yet, you look at the areas where there is gun restrictions, and the crime rate rises.
You do not look at how guns have protected citizens from the perps. I have twice provided you with evidence, and on both occassions you have willfully ignored those posts, RDD.

I saw your "evidence". Not sure what point you were trying to make with your link.

Because you aren't really competent?

 

[RDD_1210]

Yet, you look at the areas where there is gun restrictions, and the crime rate rises.
You do not look at how guns have protected citizens from the perps. I have twice provided you with evidence, and on both occassions you have willfully ignored those posts, RDD.

I saw your "evidence". Not sure what point you were trying to make with your link.

No doubt, sadly it wouldn't fit your mantra.

Are there cases where guns saved lives? Absolutely. Do those benefits outweigh the violence that guns are used for. No.

So you citing some stats about the safety guns provide doesn't explain why we have more guns than anywhere else in the world and yet we are far from the safest country.

 

[RDD_1210]

Except that is the goal...

Limit the magazine size for law abiding citizens, while criminals ignore this law
Ban weapons by using the scary term 'assault rifle' or 'assault weapon'. while criminals ignore this law

Citizens should be allowed to own hand grenades, RPG's and their own tanks then, right? I mean, the criminals will just get them if they want them, so everyone should be able to get them right?

They actually already are allowed to own those things.
But that is another reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
Really if this is the best you can do you might want to consider surfing Youtube for cute vids about cats.

If someone is playing Semantics games, you know it has to be Rabbi.

 

[The Rabbi]

I saw your "evidence". Not sure what point you were trying to make with your link.

No doubt, sadly it wouldn't fit your mantra.

Are there cases where guns saved lives? Absolutely. Do those benefits outweigh the violence that guns are used for. No.

So you citing some stats about the safety guns provide doesn't explain why we have more guns than anywhere else in the world and yet we are far from the safest country.

Well, the benefit outweighs the cost if you are the one defending yourself with a gun vs being disarmed. How much is it worth to have honest citizens slaughtered by criminals?

As to the second, because there is no direct correlation between number of guns and safety. This has already been pointed out. As has the converse, that fewer guns also do not mean less crime.

 

[The Rabbi]

Citizens should be allowed to own hand grenades, RPG's and their own tanks then, right? I mean, the criminals will just get them if they want them, so everyone should be able to get them right?

They actually already are allowed to own those things.
But that is another reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
Really if this is the best you can do you might want to consider surfing Youtube for cute vids about cats.

If someone is playing Semantics games, you know it has to be Rabbi.

Sorry I use words and phrases you don't understand so it sounds like "Semantics". There were no semantics involved.

 

[Meister]

I saw your "evidence". Not sure what point you were trying to make with your link.

No doubt, sadly it wouldn't fit your mantra.

Are there cases where guns saved lives? Absolutely. Do those benefits outweigh the violence that guns are used for. No.
So you citing some stats about the safety guns provide doesn't explain why we have more guns than anywhere else in the world and yet we are far from the safest country.

How can you understate the benefit, RDD?

Guns save more lives than they take; prevent more injuries than they inflict* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. 1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. 2* Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.3* As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.4
* Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.5https://www.gunowners.org/sk0802htm.htm
__________________
I don't understand your reasoning, RDD.

 

[Meister]

We have to remember that there isn't one pistol or rifle doing hard time in prison.
The weapon isn't the perp, the person using the weapon is the perp. The gun never forced a person to use it.

In other words, it's not the gun, its what's in the heart of the person using it.

 

[DiamondDave]

Good thing no one is seriously proposing taking guns away from law abiding citizens. Next strawman.

Except that is the goal...

Limit the magazine size for law abiding citizens, while criminals ignore this law
Ban weapons by using the scary term 'assault rifle' or 'assault weapon'. while criminals ignore this law

Citizens should be allowed to own hand grenades, RPG's and their own tanks then, right? I mean, the criminals will just get them if they want them, so everyone should be able to get them right?

Nice leap.... but that is not what was said...

Now.. granted, there are citizens who go thru SPECIAL licensing to deal with things such as machine guns, tanks, artillery, etc... if you want to go into that as a weapon manufacturer, etc, I SUPPORT YOUR FREEDOM TO DO SO AS A LAW ABIDING CITIZEN

But I mentioned the ambiguous 'ASSAULT RIFLE'... you know.. those things you like to have designated because the very same semi .223 rifle with a PISTOL GRIP suddenly becomes 'ASSAULT GRADE' ... the fear mongering BULLSHIT that has nothing to do with military grade or fully automatic ANYTHING.. it is all because people like you are afraid of an AR-15 and if someone has a 20 shot magazine instead of a 10...



And criminals HAVE got hold of grenades, explosives, and yes even TANKS

 

[The2ndAmendment]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

No one expects criminals to obey the law. If one were to follow your logic, we would have no laws making child molesting a crime. I hope that helps and is not too abstract for you to comprehend.

1) We make laws so the law-abiding citizens will follow them, without laws, not even the law abiding would care.

2) You just equated owning a firearm, a constitutional right, with child molesting...

 

[The2ndAmendment]

A few facts. Automatic weapons were banned to most of the public since the 1930s. A fully automatic weapon in the hands of a criminal is rare. About 40% of those who commit gun crimes, purchased their weapons legally. Mexico has stringent gun laws, so most of the Mexican drug gangs use straw purchaser to buy them in the United States. The offense of being a straw purchaser is essentially a hand slap.

Only because they don't need fully automatic weapons to accomplish their goals, not to mention fully autos are mad expensive on the black market and the regular market.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

how are you being "punished" if you can't have a military weapon? or a clip that holds 30 rounds of ammo?

Tyranny and the Deterioration of the Rule of Law.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

more than 2,000,000 CRIMES STOPPED by gun owners....i'd say that's effectively "overthrowing the tyrants"....

Lakota also ignored the Battle of Athens, Tennessee, 1946, where hundreds of tyrants were removed.

Or the Deacons of Defense and Justice, who marched alongside MLK during every Civil Rights march, tens of thousands of tyrants were overthrown.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

2 million is a made up number up you fucking fool, so I made one up too, clearly you can't keep up.

It comes from the Depart of Justice studies, it's not made up, libtard.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Is it wrong to restrict ownership of fully automatic weapons to the extent that we do?

Yes, it impairs our Militias in new York from obtaining them in order to assist our armed forces in the event of Invasion.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

You right wing nuts want to make it easy. Why?? Because YOU want to carry a gun and feel important. It has nothing to do with protecting anyone. You do not want gun control because then you can't have your toy. Idiots.

Read my signature boy.

The Second Amendment clearly states:

"...being necessary for the security of a free state..."

It doesn't say "optional" it says "necessary."

Now read my sig.

Sovereignty comes from the barrel of a gun.

 

[P@triot]

Go ahead...let it out. Tell us how you feel.

Unlike you I dont express feelings. I express truths. And the truth is that if we eliminate crimes committed by young black men between ages 15 and 25 our crime rate looks like France.

So what do you propose? How do you fix the problem as you see it?

That's sort of the problem with you liberals. In your naive pursuit of utopia, you believe you can "fix" human behavior and regulate evil.

The problems we face with youth stems from parents who don't give a shit. There is no "fixing" that. There is no "regulating" that. You can't make sub-human animals who reproduce care about the offspring.

Which brings us back full circle to the very beginning - which is we have to be able to protect ourselves from these sub-human animals roaming around out there (as well as from the tyranny of government).