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.
I wasn't arguing for taking guns away. I was arguing that its dishonest to say they deter crime because they clearly help crime. The argument that they deter crime is constantly used and that helps keep us from putting laws in that would help keep them away from criminals. I think we need more laws to keep them from criminals.
The 108,000 might be sound, the 2.5 million is clearly wrong. And with 108,000 defensive gun uses it's clear guns are doing way more damage than good. Like I mentioned 232,000 guns stolen each year going to criminals. How many mass shootings start with the shooter getting the gun from a family member who legally owns? How many legal gun owners go nuts and shoot somebody like the theater shooters? How many legal gun owners become criminals with that gun?
The scenarios you describe are rare. Inner city thugs make up the lions share of murders committed with firearms.
The way to stop those is a mandatory sentence of say thirty years for a crime committed with a firearm and the death penalty for murders committed with a firearm.
Stop penalizing legal gun owners because they aren't the problem.
How many inner city thugs buy a gun legally? They sure aren't the solution. They are keeping us from registering guns, making sure all gun sales have a background check, limiting magazine capacity... Making people get a background check before buying a very dangerous weapon is not penalizing. Any decent person would have no problem with it since it might just save a life. Gun owners are just to selfish to care. They pretend to be so heroic, but they can't wait a little bit to get gun number 20? Very sad.
The scenarios you describe are rare. Inner city thugs make up the lions share of murders committed with firearms.
The way to stop those is a mandatory sentence of say thirty years for a crime committed with a firearm and the death penalty for murders committed with a firearm.
Stop penalizing legal gun owners because they aren't the problem.
How many inner city thugs buy a gun legally? They sure aren't the solution. They are keeping us from registering guns, making sure all gun sales have a background check, limiting magazine capacity... Making people get a background check before buying a very dangerous weapon is not penalizing. Any decent person would have no problem with it since it might just save a life. Gun owners are just to selfish to care. They pretend to be so heroic, but they can't wait a little bit to get gun number 20? Very sad.
It has nothing to do with being selfish.
You need to make the penalties for possession of a stolen gun and or use of a gun in the commission of a crime so harsh they wont see freedom for thirty years.
Law abiding citizens shouldnt pay the price for the scum who commit crimes.
Thats total Bullshit.
How many inner city thugs buy a gun legally? They sure aren't the solution. They are keeping us from registering guns, making sure all gun sales have a background check, limiting magazine capacity... Making people get a background check before buying a very dangerous weapon is not penalizing. Any decent person would have no problem with it since it might just save a life. Gun owners are just to selfish to care. They pretend to be so heroic, but they can't wait a little bit to get gun number 20? Very sad.
It has nothing to do with being selfish.
You need to make the penalties for possession of a stolen gun and or use of a gun in the commission of a crime so harsh they wont see freedom for thirty years.
Law abiding citizens shouldnt pay the price for the scum who commit crimes.
Thats total Bullshit.
It is about being selfish. They are saying I can't wait a few days to buy gun number 20 even if it could save some childs life. That is pretty darn selfish.
While I'm not against stricter punishment I don't know our jails can handle it. Or if it would for sure work, we do have more people in jail than any other country.
It has nothing to do with being selfish.
You need to make the penalties for possession of a stolen gun and or use of a gun in the commission of a crime so harsh they wont see freedom for thirty years.
Law abiding citizens shouldnt pay the price for the scum who commit crimes.
Thats total Bullshit.
It is about being selfish. They are saying I can't wait a few days to buy gun number 20 even if it could save some childs life. That is pretty darn selfish.
While I'm not against stricter punishment I don't know our jails can handle it. Or if it would for sure work, we do have more people in jail than any other country.
What does waiting have to do with it? I see no reason why a law abiding citizen should have to wait to purchase a firearm.
We need to stop locking people up for petty shit and we'll have plenty of room in our prisons for those who really deserve it.
You'll have to excuse him -like all other anti-gun loons, he can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.The scenarios you describe are rare. Inner city thugs make up the lions share of murders committed with firearms.
The way to stop those is a mandatory sentence of say thirty years for a crime committed with a firearm and the death penalty for murders committed with a firearm.
Stop penalizing legal gun owners because they aren't the problem.
How many inner city thugs buy a gun legally? They sure aren't the solution. They are keeping us from registering guns, making sure all gun sales have a background check, limiting magazine capacity... Making people get a background check before buying a very dangerous weapon is not penalizing. Any decent person would have no problem with it since it might just save a life. Gun owners are just to selfish to care. They pretend to be so heroic, but they can't wait a little bit to get gun number 20? Very sad.
It has nothing to do with being selfish.
You need to make the penalties for possession of a stolen gun and or use of a gun in the commission of a crime so harsh they wont see freedom for thirty years.
Law abiding citizens shouldnt pay the price for the scum who commit crimes.
Thats total Bullshit.
You are litterally too dishonest to talk to.So you can't name one? Everyone knows Saddam was a dictator. Name a country with real long standing voting rights that has ever had a revolution.
You said elections. You made no qualifiers to that statement, and a tyranny is what we are arguing against.
Again..Iraq had a long standing voting record. You speak as if your voting rights in a democracy are somehow protected. WE are not a democracy. In fact, no county in the world is a democracy.
You seem to have missed the whole point. The point is a country like the US with voting rights has never gone to tyranny. Even countries that don't have guns all over the place to defend their rights. The only countries named are nothing like the US and don't have long standing voting rights. So you see we don't need guns to defend our rights. Sorry you didn't get it. If you ever think of a country that's a good example let me know, but I don't think one exists.
So tell Me, now does taking guns away from people who have not had guns stolen from them, have not had a gun of their used in a crime, and have not been involved in a crime, make the world, or the country, safer? These people are not part of your stats....btw....defensive gun use statistics are sound. I realize you refuse to believe that, but then, I think you refuse to think that pink unicorns are myths.Well 232,000 guns are stolen each year. That's going from a gun owner to a criminal.
I wasn't arguing for taking guns away. I was arguing that its dishonest to say they deter crime because they clearly help crime. The argument that they deter crime is constantly used and that helps keep us from putting laws in that would help keep them away from criminals. I think we need more laws to keep them from criminals.
The 108,000 might be sound, the 2.5 million is clearly wrong. And with 108,000 defensive gun uses it's clear guns are doing way more damage than good. Like I mentioned 232,000 guns stolen each year going to criminals. How many mass shootings start with the shooter getting the gun from a family member who legally owns? How many legal gun owners go nuts and shoot somebody like the theater shooters? How many legal gun owners become criminals with that gun?
The scenarios you describe are rare. Inner city thugs make up the lions share of murders committed with firearms.
The way to stop those is a mandatory sentence of say thirty years for a crime committed with a firearm and the death penalty for murders committed with a firearm.
Stop penalizing legal gun owners because they aren't the problem.
How do you know this?Wrong. The majority of gun deaths (6 in 10) are suicide, by "responsible" gun owners.The scenarios you describe are rare. Inner city thugs make up the lions share of murders committed with firearms.
The way to stop those is a mandatory sentence of say thirty years for a crime committed with a firearm and the death penalty for murders committed with a firearm.
Stop penalizing legal gun owners because they aren't the problem.
if you are a registered owner, you are apparently among thiose who "should" have one becaise those than "should not" cannot register.Obviously we need to get the guns out of the hands of registered owners who own them and shouldn't.
What about the huge majortity of us gun owners of us who are not registered?And since guns used in other deaths are primarily stolen, we need to tighten laws to keep registered, so-called responsible gun owners from letting their guns get stolen.
So tell Me, now does taking guns away from people who have not had guns stolen from them, have not had a gun of their used in a crime, and have not been involved in a crime, make the world, or the country, safer? These people are not part of your stats....btw....defensive gun use statistics are sound. I realize you refuse to believe that, but then, I think you refuse to think that pink unicorns are myths.
I wasn't arguing for taking guns away. I was arguing that its dishonest to say they deter crime because they clearly help crime. The argument that they deter crime is constantly used and that helps keep us from putting laws in that would help keep them away from criminals. I think we need more laws to keep them from criminals.
The 108,000 might be sound, the 2.5 million is clearly wrong. And with 108,000 defensive gun uses it's clear guns are doing way more damage than good. Like I mentioned 232,000 guns stolen each year going to criminals. How many mass shootings start with the shooter getting the gun from a family member who legally owns? How many legal gun owners go nuts and shoot somebody like the theater shooters? How many legal gun owners become criminals with that gun?
They help crime? How do they do that? Do they plan the crimes? Keep a lookout for the coppers? Drive the getaway vehicle?
You'll have to excuse him -like all other anti-gun loons, he can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.How many inner city thugs buy a gun legally? They sure aren't the solution. They are keeping us from registering guns, making sure all gun sales have a background check, limiting magazine capacity... Making people get a background check before buying a very dangerous weapon is not penalizing. Any decent person would have no problem with it since it might just save a life. Gun owners are just to selfish to care. They pretend to be so heroic, but they can't wait a little bit to get gun number 20? Very sad.
It has nothing to do with being selfish.
You need to make the penalties for possession of a stolen gun and or use of a gun in the commission of a crime so harsh they wont see freedom for thirty years.
Law abiding citizens shouldnt pay the price for the scum who commit crimes.
Thats total Bullshit.
You are litterally too dishonest to talk to.
You said elections. You made no qualifiers to that statement, and a tyranny is what we are arguing against.
Again..Iraq had a long standing voting record. You speak as if your voting rights in a democracy are somehow protected. WE are not a democracy. In fact, no county in the world is a democracy.
You seem to have missed the whole point. The point is a country like the US with voting rights has never gone to tyranny. Even countries that don't have guns all over the place to defend their rights. The only countries named are nothing like the US and don't have long standing voting rights. So you see we don't need guns to defend our rights. Sorry you didn't get it. If you ever think of a country that's a good example let me know, but I don't think one exists.
Rome had voting rights almost identical to those in the US, aren't you the one that argued that they were a tyranny?
I wasn't arguing for taking guns away. I was arguing that its dishonest to say they deter crime because they clearly help crime. The argument that they deter crime is constantly used and that helps keep us from putting laws in that would help keep them away from criminals. I think we need more laws to keep them from criminals.
The 108,000 might be sound, the 2.5 million is clearly wrong. And with 108,000 defensive gun uses it's clear guns are doing way more damage than good. Like I mentioned 232,000 guns stolen each year going to criminals. How many mass shootings start with the shooter getting the gun from a family member who legally owns? How many legal gun owners go nuts and shoot somebody like the theater shooters? How many legal gun owners become criminals with that gun?
They help crime? How do they do that? Do they plan the crimes? Keep a lookout for the coppers? Drive the getaway vehicle?
Yes gun owners do those things.
They help crime? How do they do that? Do they plan the crimes? Keep a lookout for the coppers? Drive the getaway vehicle?
Yes gun owners do those things.
You said guns help crime, not gun owners, is this another case of you moving the goalposts because you are stupid?
Yes gun owners do those things.
You said guns help crime, not gun owners, is this another case of you moving the goalposts because you are stupid?
No. They both do obviously.
So what? 2nd amendment doesn't say UNLESS YOU ARE A CRIMINAL YOU CAN'T OWN A WEAPON. I know someone who can't get a permit simply because 4 years ago they got into it with their MIL and BOTH were arrested and the charges were dropped and they haven't been in trouble since then...the only gun law I abide by is the 2nd amendment it very clearly says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Well, you're not alone. Many others believe they are above the law and many of those are in prison.
Like those 300k in Ct breaking the law?
Every society has this fringe element, supporting everything that helps the country rot from inside.
You said guns help crime, not gun owners, is this another case of you moving the goalposts because you are stupid?
No. They both do obviously.
Yet you cannot provide any evidence.
Feds Demand Owner of Gun Parts Store Turn Over Customer List?but This Former Marine and CEO Is Not Complying | Video | TheBlaze.com
Good! Know your rights and use them!
