Florida high school students stage second amendment support walkout

[Auld Phart]

It clearly shows the highest number stolen per year is 191,000.

OMFG, you're not reading the thing you're referencing!

That's 191,000 victims...but the link you posted goes on to say that more than one gun is stolen in some of those incidents, which is why they later say in your fucking link that the number is 230,000 because of multiple guns being stolen in each incident.

So what your chart there shows is that there were 191,000 reported incidents of thefts, but 230,000 stolen guns from those incidents.

THIS IS IN THE LINK YOU POSTED THAT YOU SLOPPILY RUSHED THROUGH AND DIDN'T READ.

From your link:
Their study shows 145 thousand victimizations involving the theft of a firearm in 2010. As more than one firearm is averaged for each theft, the study notes that an average of 232,000 guns were stolen in each year from 2005 to 2010. This is consistent with the NCIC numbers. ​

I mean seriously, why are you still posting!? This is embarrassing, having me have to explain your own shitty link to you. What a fucking dumbass. Someone this fucking dumb, sloppy, and reckless should definitely not be allowed to own guns.

That's the highest, now I'm not going to take the time to average everything, but it's definitely 40k+ less than your claimed "230K".

That's assuming only one gun is stolen per theft, but it's not the reality. The reality, that your own link says, is that in some of those incidents, more than one gun is stolen.

So you just lied again and tried to misrepresent a number you didn't even bother to fully comprehend or read yourself.

Sloppy, sloppy work from a sloppy, sloppy person.

Lay off the gratuitous insults

 

[miketx]

Or maybe I invested as little time as possible in it, because I have a real job.

1. I doubt you have a job.
2. You're making an excuse for your own sloppiness.
3. Just fucking admit you were wrong, that you posted in haste, and that you didn't bother to fully vet the thing you were referencing?

I don't see why that's so difficult for you; admitting you're wrong. I think it's personal with you, and that you tie all the shit you do here to your own personal character...so when you fuck up, just like you did here, you take that not as simply a fuckup within your own argument, but a fuckup you take personally. That it's somehow a reflection on you that your argument is shit. Guess what? It is. Your shit, garbage posts reflect on you as a person. So when you post shitty, reckless, sloppy things, it reflects you as a shitty, reckless, sloppy person.

And someone as shitty, sloppy, and reckless as that shouldn't be a gun owner, right?

What's with all your profanity laced personal attacks here man? All I'm trying to do is reason with you and it appears you go off in left field cussing and ranting? Having a gun is the best and safest means to repel and attack from a criminal. That's a fact.

 

[The Derp]

Lemme guess, you had a BB gun and someone broke in and stole it, amirite?

What happened was that you posted something stupid, that you didn't bother to comprehend, that supported my argument and you excused it by admitting you did so in haste and sloppily.

So what happened? Were you just filled with so much frustration and rage that you had to run to your Conservative safe space (aka GUNWATCH) to try and refute a point that shoved a dagger into your argument? Because that strategy sure as shit didn't work when I did your work for you and actually read the thing you used to support your argument.

The funny thing about it is that it supported exactly what I said.

So you failed to defend your point and instead helped me support mine.

Way. To. Go. Dumbass.

 

[The Derp]

in either case, it was acquired illegally.

Not at first. At first it was legally purchased by a "responsible gun owner". It got to the criminal through illegal means but it came from the "responsible gun owner".

It was either stolen from the "responsible gun owner", lost by the "responsible gun owner", or sold by the "responsible gun owner" to a shady character because they needed the money.

No gun "falls off a truck" or materializes out of thin air into the hands of a criminal. All "illegal guns" come from "responsible gun owners" and their negligence.

And that's precisely why I don't think anyone should be allowed to buy guns.

 

[Pop23]

Or maybe I invested as little time as possible in it, because I have a real job.

1. I doubt you have a job.
2. You're making an excuse for your own sloppiness.
3. Just fucking admit you were wrong, that you posted in haste, and that you didn't bother to fully vet the thing you were referencing?

I don't see why that's so difficult for you; admitting you're wrong. I think it's personal with you, and that you tie all the shit you do here to your own personal character...so when you fuck up, just like you did here, you take that not as simply a fuckup within your own argument, but a fuckup you take personally. That it's somehow a reflection on you that your argument is shit. Guess what? It is. Your shit, garbage posts reflect on you as a person. So when you post shitty, reckless, sloppy things, it reflects you as a shitty, reckless, sloppy person.

And someone as shitty, sloppy, and reckless as that shouldn't be a gun owner, right?

What's with all your profanity laced personal attacks here man? All I'm trying to do is reason with you and it appears you go off in left field cussing and ranting? Having a gun is the best and safest means to repel and attack from a criminal. That's a fact.

You have to wonder why this is so hard for some to understand? Maybe they don't want folks able to protect themselves because it deprives them of taking your stuff without worrying about you defending your selves. Probably gangs encouraging this.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Or maybe I invested as little time as possible in it, because I have a real job.

1. I doubt you have a job.
2. You're making an excuse for your own sloppiness.
3. Just fucking admit you were wrong, that you posted in haste, and that you didn't bother to fully vet the thing you were referencing?

I don't see why that's so difficult for you; admitting you're wrong. I think it's personal with you, and that you tie all the shit you do here to your own personal character...so when you fuck up, just like you did here, you take that not as simply a fuckup within your own argument, but a fuckup you take personally. That it's somehow a reflection on you that your argument is shit. Guess what? It is. Your shit, garbage posts reflect on you as a person. So when you post shitty, reckless, sloppy things, it reflects you as a shitty, reckless, sloppy person.

And someone as shitty, sloppy, and reckless as that shouldn't be a gun owner, right?

I didn't read into it that far. I know how futile it is to argue with a wackadoodle.

 

[miketx]

in either case, it was acquired illegally.

Not at first. At first it was legally purchased by a "responsible gun owner". It got to the criminal through illegal means but it came from the "responsible gun owner".

It was either stolen from the "responsible gun owner", lost by the "responsible gun owner", or sold by the "responsible gun owner" to a shady character because they needed the money.

No gun "falls off a truck" or materializes out of thin air into the hands of a criminal. All "illegal guns" come from "responsible gun owners" and their negligence.

And that's precisely why I don't think anyone should be allowed to buy guns.

So now you claim that law abiding citizens are responsible for criminals committing crimes? So that's what you mean when you say "responsible" gun owners. That sounds like fascism to me. Is that what you propose? Fascism?

 

[Auld Phart]

in either case, it was acquired illegally.

Not at first. At first it was legally purchased by a "responsible gun owner". It got to the criminal through illegal means but it came from the "responsible gun owner".

It was either stolen from the "responsible gun owner", lost by the "responsible gun owner", or sold by the "responsible gun owner" to a shady character because they needed the money.

No gun "falls off a truck" or materializes out of thin air into the hands of a criminal. All "illegal guns" come from "responsible gun owners" and their negligence.

And that's precisely why I don't think anyone should be allowed to buy guns.

At first it was legally purchased by a "responsible gun owner".

Yes

It got to the criminal through illegal means

yes

the rest of your post is bullshit tho

 

[The Derp]

Sure you have twisted what I said.

No I haven't. I've quoted you directly every single time so there's no confusion about what you said. You're finding now that your own position is contradictory of itself, and that's why you think I'm twisting your words when I haven't done that at all. In fact, I've taken careful pains to quote you directly. So your defense here is the actual straw man; that I'm twisting your words. I am not, nor have I done that.

I said having a guns evens the odds for you.

Which you offer no proof, and which is based on absolutely nothing. Having guns only increases the odds that a criminal will get their hands on it, since most guns criminals get are from "responsible gun owners" who buy them to "even the odds". In what? Who fucking knows. No odds are evened. The only odds that change are the odds a bystander will be harmed, or your gun will disappear from your possession...and in the case of the latter, there's a less than 90% chance you'll even report the gun stolen to the cops.

"even the odds"? Not at all.

Then you twist it to say I said something else.

Stop whining like a little bitch. I haven't twisted anything. I've quoted you directly and accurately. If you're whining that you think I'm twisting what you say, that's because you're twisting what you say and not fully comprehending that to which you are twisting.

Now you admit wanting people to go up against a crazed shooter unarmed.

1. That "crazed shooter" likely purchased their weapon legally. That's because you think people should be allowed to buy weapons. No guns = no shooters. That's the bottom line.

2. The Vegas shooting didn't happen in a gun-free zone; people were allowed to carry weapons on the Strip and into the concert, yet not one single "good guy with a gun" showed up. How come?

We have seen the outcome of that several times in gun free zones, as late as yesterday. What madness makes you want to see innocents killed like that?

The Vegas shooting, which is the worst mass shooting in our history, didn't happen in a gun free zone. But not one single "good guy with a gun" showed up. How come?

 

[Marion Morrison]

in either case, it was acquired illegally.

Not at first. At first it was legally purchased by a "responsible gun owner". It got to the criminal through illegal means but it came from the "responsible gun owner".

It was either stolen from the "responsible gun owner", lost by the "responsible gun owner", or sold by the "responsible gun owner" to a shady character because they needed the money.

No gun "falls off a truck" or materializes out of thin air into the hands of a criminal. All "illegal guns" come from "responsible gun owners" and their negligence.

And that's precisely why I don't think anyone should be allowed to buy guns.

So now you claim that law abiding citizens are responsible for criminals committing crimes? So that's what you mean when you say "responsible" gun owners. That sounds like fascism to me. Is that what you propose? Fascism?

He's a kook. Probably isn't allowed to own a gun as a result of being institutionalized or incarcerated, so he wants everyone to share his misery.

 

[miketx]

in either case, it was acquired illegally.

Not at first. At first it was legally purchased by a "responsible gun owner". It got to the criminal through illegal means but it came from the "responsible gun owner".

It was either stolen from the "responsible gun owner", lost by the "responsible gun owner", or sold by the "responsible gun owner" to a shady character because they needed the money.

No gun "falls off a truck" or materializes out of thin air into the hands of a criminal. All "illegal guns" come from "responsible gun owners" and their negligence.

And that's precisely why I don't think anyone should be allowed to buy guns.

So now you claim that law abiding citizens are responsible for criminals committing crimes? So that's what you mean when you say "responsible" gun owners. That sounds like fascism to me. Is that what you propose? Fascism?

He's a kook. Probably isn't allowed to own a gun as a result of being institutionalized or incarcerated, so he wants everyone to share his misery.

If that's the case then perhaps the schools are safer for that. All I know is that having a gun makes you better able to protect your family from a criminal who refuses to obey laws.

 

[The Derp]

There wouldn't be armed criminals if they weren't criminals. You make one helluva circular argument.

That's not the argument I made. Armed criminals are only armed because they got a gun from a "responsible gun owner" either actively via a sale, or passively via theft or lost.

You admit that people are the problem, but your only solution is to let the problem buy guns. That's not common sense...that's nihilism.

They wouldn't be free if leftists weren't so lax on the punishment.

This isn't about punishing criminals, this is about you making it possible for those criminals to be armed with guns because you're too reckless, lazy, and irresponsible to manage your own weapons.

Armed burglary is taken very seriously here..

Then you would know that most armed burglaries happen when no one is home, and most illegal guns are stolen in home break-ins.

So you buy a gun to defend your home from a break-in, then the gun is stolen when thieves break into your home when you're not there.

THAT is circular and masturbatory.

When they get you (There is no "if") you will be doing 20+ years or more. Not sure what state is lax on things like that, but it surely isn't here. The cops go after people that steal guns full-force, 24/7 until they get them, priority one.

Now you're just spamming and obfuscating the board with crap that is so convoluted even you can't keep track of it.

 

[miketx]

Sure you have twisted what I said.

No I haven't. I've quoted you directly every single time so there's no confusion about what you said. You're finding now that your own position is contradictory of itself, and that's why you think I'm twisting your words when I haven't done that at all. In fact, I've taken careful pains to quote you directly. So your defense here is the actual straw man; that I'm twisting your words. I am not, nor have I done that.

I said having a guns evens the odds for you.

Which you offer no proof, and which is based on absolutely nothing. Having guns only increases the odds that a criminal will get their hands on it, since most guns criminals get are from "responsible gun owners" who buy them to "even the odds". In what? Who fucking knows. No odds are evened. The only odds that change are the odds a bystander will be harmed, or your gun will disappear from your possession...and in the case of the latter, there's a less than 90% chance you'll even report the gun stolen to the cops.

"even the odds"? Not at all.

Then you twist it to say I said something else.

Stop whining like a little bitch. I haven't twisted anything. I've quoted you directly and accurately. If you're whining that you think I'm twisting what you say, that's because you're twisting what you say and not fully comprehending that to which you are twisting.

Now you admit wanting people to go up against a crazed shooter unarmed.

1. That "crazed shooter" likely purchased their weapon legally. That's because you think people should be allowed to buy weapons. No guns = no shooters. That's the bottom line.

2. The Vegas shooting didn't happen in a gun-free zone; people were allowed to carry weapons on the Strip and into the concert, yet not one single "good guy with a gun" showed up. How come?

We have seen the outcome of that several times in gun free zones, as late as yesterday. What madness makes you want to see innocents killed like that?

The Vegas shooting, which is the worst mass shooting in our history, didn't happen in a gun free zone. But not one single "good guy with a gun" showed up. How come?

Man you need psychiatric help. I sincerely hope someone can help you before you hurt someone. Have a good day.

 

[miketx]

There wouldn't be armed criminals if they weren't criminals. You make one helluva circular argument.

That's not the argument I made. Armed criminals are only armed because they got a gun from a "responsible gun owner" either actively via a sale, or passively via theft or lost.

You admit that people are the problem, but your only solution is to let the problem buy guns. That's not common sense...that's nihilism.

They wouldn't be free if leftists weren't so lax on the punishment.

This isn't about punishing criminals, this is about you making it possible for those criminals to be armed with guns because you're too reckless, lazy, and irresponsible to manage your own weapons.

Armed burglary is taken very seriously here..

Then you would know that most armed burglaries happen when no one is home, and most illegal guns are stolen in home break-ins.

So you buy a gun to defend your home from a break-in, then the gun is stolen when thieves break into your home when you're not there.

THAT is circular and masturbatory.

When they get you (There is no "if") you will be doing 20+ years or more. Not sure what state is lax on things like that, but it surely isn't here. The cops go after people that steal guns full-force, 24/7 until they get them, priority one.

Now you're just spamming and obfuscating the board with crap that is so convoluted even you can't keep track of it.

So law abiding people are responsible for the acts of criminals?

 

[The Derp]

None of my guns have ever been stolen

...yet. That doesn't mean there's no possibility of it happening. And then there's less than a 90% chance you'd even tell the cops if one was.

You're asking society to put too much faith in your ability to be responsible without giving a good reason why. The only reason you've given is "because I want one!" Which isn't a good reason.

so I'd say once again you are letting your baseless emotions and hatred of Americans get in the way of reason.

I don't believe you're an American, firstly. Let's make that clear; I don't believe you are an American. I believe you to be a Russian troll who is testing out rhetoric here that you will then disseminate across broader social media in an effort to divide Americans. The reason I think this is because that's what Russian trolls have admitted to doing. And since your profile was created in the middle of that Troll Army ramp-up by Putin, and since you post in broken English, and since you can't keep a singular through-line to what you're saying, I believe you to be lying about who you are and why you're here.

 

[miketx]

None of my guns have ever been stolen

...yet. That doesn't mean there's no possibility of it happening. And then there's less than a 90% chance you'd even tell the cops if one was.

You're asking society to put too much faith in your ability to be responsible without giving a good reason why. The only reason you've given is "because I want one!" Which isn't a good reason.

so I'd say once again you are letting your baseless emotions and hatred of Americans get in the way of reason.

I don't believe you're an American, firstly. Let's make that clear; I don't believe you are an American. I believe you to be a Russian troll who is testing out rhetoric here that you will then disseminate across broader social media in an effort to divide Americans. The reason I think this is because that's what Russian trolls have admitted to doing. And since your profile was created in the middle of that Troll Army ramp-up by Putin, and since you post in broken English, and since you can't keep a singular through-line to what you're saying, I believe you to be lying about who you are and why you're here.

Nyet comrade, nyet!

 

[The Derp]

Lay off the gratuitous insults

Seriously? Take a gander through this thread and check out the insults hurled by these people at me, and those they shit out in general.

Calling someone sloppy because they act sloppily isn't an insult.

 

[The Derp]

What's with all your profanity laced personal attacks here man?

You started this shit, and I'm going to finish it. You don't get to play the victim now after sending me three harassing PM's within an hour because I tore your crap argument to shreds and your ego can't let it go.

 

[Auld Phart]

Lay off the gratuitous insults

Seriously? Take a gander through this thread and check out the insults hurled by these people at me, and those they shit out in general.

Calling someone sloppy because they act sloppily isn't an insult.

Seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Comparing your insults to the others is like comparing the Hilton to a mud hut.

Clean it up.

(and 'sloppy' wasn't even part of it)

 

[The Derp]

I didn't read into it that far.

Why not?