Florida high school students stage second amendment support walkout

[The Derp]

So now you claim that law abiding citizens are responsible for criminals committing crimes?

Yup. You supplied the gun for the criminal to steal when you brought it into your home. Since all guns in the hands of criminals were once guns in the hands of "responsible gun owners", you made the choice to have that weapon in the supply of guns to steal. So you bear responsibility for that negligent choice as far as I'm concerned.

So that's what you mean when you say "responsible" gun owners. That sounds like fascism to me. Is that what you propose? Fascism?

Stop using words (fascism) that you don't understand. It reflects poorly on you and your argument and the thing you're defending.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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)

I've thread banned him

 

[2aguy]

Gun ownership has lowered our violent crime rates......since the 1990s more Americans own and carry guns

No, you're actually wrong. Gun ownership is at its lowest levels in 40 years as recent as June 2016:

"A recent CBS News poll found that 36% of adults either personally own a firearm or live with someone who does–the lowest level since 1978. That’s 10% lower than gun ownership rates in 2012 and 17 points lower than 1994’s high of 53%."​

So as gun ownership declines, as does the crime rate. Not vice-versa.

And Americans use their guns 1,500, 000 times a year to stop violent criminals committing rape, robbery, murder, kidnapping.....criminals the democrats keep letting out of jail over and over again.....

No they don't. That study's authors even say that the number ranges from as few as 100,000 to as many as 1.5 million. In fact, the authors of that very study you're misrepresenting say that they need additional research in order to draw any kind of conclusion. And you're the ones who refuse the CDC to do research. So you're lying by omission here when you leave out the part, from the actual study, that says more study is needed.

You are such a dumb ass...this, from a few weeks ago......you dumb ass...

NBC Poll: Does Gun Ownership Increase Or Decrease Safety? Anti-Gun Activists Won't Like The Results.

nearly 6 in 10 Americans believe that getting guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens increases safety.

"In the poll, 58 percent agree with the statement that gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves," NBC News reports. "By contrast, 38 percent say that gun ownership reduces safety by giving too many people access to firearms, increasing the chances for accidental misuse."

------

NBC notes that the overall result is a "reversal" of the findings of a 1999 survey that found that 52 percent of respondents believed gun ownership reduced safety. The more positive perspective on gun ownership is partly reflected in gun ownership trends: "47 percent of American adults say they have a firearm in the household, which is up from 44 percent in 1999."

 

[2aguy]

Gun ownership has lowered our violent crime rates......since the 1990s more Americans own and carry guns

No, you're actually wrong. Gun ownership is at its lowest levels in 40 years as recent as June 2016:

"A recent CBS News poll found that 36% of adults either personally own a firearm or live with someone who does–the lowest level since 1978. That’s 10% lower than gun ownership rates in 2012 and 17 points lower than 1994’s high of 53%."​

So as gun ownership declines, as does the crime rate. Not vice-versa.

And Americans use their guns 1,500, 000 times a year to stop violent criminals committing rape, robbery, murder, kidnapping.....criminals the democrats keep letting out of jail over and over again.....

No they don't. That study's authors even say that the number ranges from as few as 100,000 to as many as 1.5 million. In fact, the authors of that very study you're misrepresenting say that they need additional research in order to draw any kind of conclusion. And you're the ones who refuse the CDC to do research. So you're lying by omission here when you leave out the part, from the actual study, that says more study is needed.

Wrong....the two researchers were hired by bill clinton to prove Dr. Gary Kleck's study wrong.......he found close to 2,500,000 times a year that Americans use guns for self defense.....so clinton hired two anti gunners...they created their own study to find the "real" number, they used actual research methods, and they found, from their own work, the number was 1,500,000 times a year.....and then they spent the rest of their study saying how their own work was wrong......just before bill clinton had them deported to the Antarctic......

The CDC wasn't banned from doing gun research, dumb ass....

No, The Government Is Not 'Banned' From Studying Gun Violence

Absolutely nothing in the amendment prohibits the CDC from studying “gun violence,” even if this narrowly focused topic tells us little. In response to this inconvenient fact, gun controllers will explain that while there isn’t an outright ban, the Dickey amendment has a “chilling” effect on the study of gun violence.


Does it? Pointing out that “research plummeted after the 1996 ban” could just as easily tell us that most research funded by the CDC had been politically motivated. Because the idea that the CDC, whose spectacular mission creep has taken it from its primary goal of preventing malaria and other dangerous communicable diseases, to spending hundreds of millions of dollars nagging you about how much salt you put on your steaks or how often you do calisthenics, is nervous about the repercussions of engaging in non-partisan research is hard to believe.

Also unlikely is the notion that a $2.6 million cut in funding so horrified the agency that it was rendered powerless to pay for or conduct studies on gun violence. The CDC funding tripled from 1996 to 2010. The CDC’s budget is over six billion dollars today.

And the idea that the CDC was paralyzed through two-years of full Democratic Party control, and then six years under a president who was more antagonistic towards the Second Amendment than any other in history, is difficult to believe, because it’s provably false.

In 2013, President Barack Obama not only signed an Executive Order directing the CDC to research “gun violence,” the administration also provided an additional $10 million to do it. Here is the study on gun violence that was supposedly banned and yet funded by the CDC. You might not have heard about the resulting research, because it contains numerous inconvenient facts about gun ownership that fails to propel the predetermined narrative. Trump’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar is also open to the idea of funding more gun violence research.

It’s not banned. It’s not chilled.

Meanwhile, numerous states and private entities fund peer-reviewed studies and other research on gun violence. I know this because gun control advocates are constantly sending me studies that distort and conflate issues to help them make their arguments. My inbox is bombarded with studies and conferences and “webinars” dissecting gun violence.

The real problem here is two-fold. One, researchers want the CDC involved so they can access government data about American gun owners. Considering the rhetoric coming from Democrats — gun ownership being tantamount to terrorism, and so on — there’s absolutely no reason Republicans should acquiesce to helping gun controllers circumvent the privacy of Americans citizens peacefully practicing their Constitutional rights.

Second, gun control advocates want to lift the ban on politically skewed research because they’re interested in producing politically skewed research. When the American Medical Association declares gun violence a “public health crisis,” it’s not interested in a balance look at the issue. When researchers advocate lifting the restrictions on advocacy at the CDC, they don’t even pretend they not to hold pre-conceived notions about the outcomes.

-------

There’s no reason to allow activists — then or now — to use the veneer of state-sanctioned science for their partisan purposes. For example, we now know that Rosenberg and others at the CDC turned out to be wrong about the correlation between guns and crime — a steep drop in gun crimes coincided with the explosions of gun ownership from 1996 to 2014.

 

[2aguy]

Thanks for finally admitting that guns do nothing by themselves. They have to have a criminal attached to then. Thank you!

No, what guns do by themselves is increase the supply from which thieves can steal.

And if people are the problem, not guns, why do you insist on letting the problem buy the guns?

Tell that to the British, dumb ass...they banned and confiscated guns and their criminals are increasing their gun crime....

Britain v. The United States...

Britain...banned guns....

Yorkshire sees highest number of crimes for any county in Britain according to figures

“In particular we’re shocked to see an increase of nearly 30 per cent in weapon possession offences between 2016 and 2017.”

Crimes covered violent and sexual offences, vehicle theft, public order offences, possession of weapons, shoplifting, personal theft, drug crimes, robbery, criminal damage, bicycle thefts and anti-social behaviour.


========

Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade | Daily Mail Online

The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year - a rise of 89 per cent.

The number of people injured or killed by guns, excluding air weapons, has increased from 864 in 1998/99 to a provisional figure of 1,760 in 2008/09, an increase of 104 per cent .


========



Crime rise is biggest in a decade, ONS figures show

Ministers will also be concerned that the country is becoming increasingly violent in nature, with gun crime rising 23% to 6,375 offences, largely driven by an increase in the use of handguns.

=========



Gun crime in London increases by 42% - BBC News

Gun crime offences in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics.

Top trauma surgeon reveals shocking extent of London’s gun crime

A leading trauma surgeon has told how the number of patients treated for gunshot injuries at a major London hospital has doubled in the last five years.

----

He said the hospital’s major trauma centre had seen a bigger rise in gunshot injuries compared to knife wounds and that the average age of victims was getting younger.

-----

Last year, gun crime offences in London increased for a third year running and by 42 per cent, from 1,793 offences in 2015/16 to 2,544 offences in 2016/17. Police have seized 635 guns off the streets so far this year.

Dr Griffiths, who also teaches medical students, said: “Our numbers of victims of gun injury have doubled [since 2012]. Gunshot injuries represent about 2.5 per cent of our penetrating trauma.

-----

Dr Griffiths said the average age of gun crime victims needing treatment at the hospital had decreased from 25 to the mid to late teens since 2012.

He added that medics at the Barts Health hospital’s major trauma centre in Whitechapel had seen a bigger rise in patients with gun injuries rather than knife wounds and that most were caused by pistols or shotguns.

Met Police commander Jim Stokley, who was also invited to speak at the meeting, said that handguns and shotguns were the weapons of choice and that 46 per cent of London’s gun crime discharges were gang-related.

He said: “We believe that a lot of it is associated with the drugs trade, and by that I mean people dealing drugs at street level and disagreements between different gangs.”

Violent crime on the rise in every corner of the country, figures suggest

But analysis of the figures force by force, showed the full extent of the problem, with only one constabulary, Nottinghamshire, recording a reduction in violent offences.

The vast majority of police forces actually witnessed double digit rises in violent crime, with Northumbria posting a 95 per cent increase year on year.

Of the other forces, Durham Police recorded a 73 per cent rise; West Yorkshire was up 48 per cent; Avon and Somerset 45 per cent; Dorset 39 per cent and Warwickshire 37 per cent.

Elsewhere Humberside, South Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Wiltshire and Dyfed Powys all saw violence rise by more than a quarter year on year.


The U.S., 600 million guns in private hands and over 17 million people carrying guns for self defense.......

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[WEATHER53]

Man I pray a psycho criminal never breaks into my house and eats my rat poison. I would be in a heap of trouble, totally responsible for his demise

 

[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.

Oh no! Only a fool would not notify the police of having their guns stolen. And all of mine are purchased legally.

 

[OKTexas]

Yes, we are cowards for wanting to defend our own families.

Your gun isn't going to defend your family. More likely, you will lose it or it will be stolen from you, and there's less than a 90% chance you will even tell the police if that happens. All you're doing by bringing a gun into your home is adding to the supply of guns from which criminals will steal. 230,000 are stolen every year. In the time it took me to write this response, between 2 and 3 guns have just been stolen.

Gun ownership is a disease of body and mind. It's an act of selfishness and recklessness that only contributes to crime, it doesn't stop or deter it.

The CDC disagrees. 1.5 million defensive uses per year, far out weigh the offensive uses.


.

 

[OKTexas]

So you're claiming there are no guns smuggled into the US, prove it.

No, that's not how debate works. You can't demand I prove your negative. Instead, you have to prove they are smuggled into the US, otherwise my response to your proof of the negative is to ask; when did you stop beating your wife?

You claimed every gun in criminal hands was stolen form legal gun owner, prove none were smuggled or narrative is just bullshit.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Hey fuck face, I'm retired military, there goes that theory. LMAO

1. I don't believe you and I think you're making that shit up just to lend your argument false credibility it doesn't have.

2. Retired military are among the last group of people who should be allowed to buy guns. Chris Kyle, The American Sniper, was killed by retired military, at a gun range, with a legally purchased firearm.

Well child I've posted my DD 214 on this site, you're more than welcome to go find it. And your second point is a total LIE. Run along child you're boring me.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Actually per capita they have more mass shooting deaths than the US.

No they don't. You just made that shit up out of thin air.

. But let's not little things like facts get in the way of good propaganda, right?

Ironic because that's exactly the situation here, but reversed with you posting propaganda and me posting facts.

For instance, it is a fact that 230,000 guns are stolen from people like you every year. It is also a fact that those stolen guns are fueling crime. It's also a fact that when your gun is lost and/or stolen, there's a less than 90% chance you'll even tell the cops about it.

So why the fuck should you be trusted with a gun?

 

[kaz]

I've already addressed that

No you haven't. Not at all. Not even close. Not one word.

From ABC News, January 25th, 2013:

'Hot' Guns Fueling Crime, US Study Says
An estimated 230,000 guns per year are stolen in home burglaries and property crimes, according to a study by the Department of Justice.​

This is your argument and you've produced so far zero links. It's your time to do some research to back up your argument, boy chick

I've done the research, it's you who lacks any research skills.

Here's the derps problem.

He thinks getting rid of legal ownership will somehow limit those with criminal intent from getting guns.

Do you realize Derp (and god that is an incredibly appropriate name), that there actually are manufacturers outside the united states? and that criminals really don't care if they follow import/export laws. And you do know that just about any highly trained machinist can make a really good gun. Hell, soon you'll be able to 3D print a reasonably lethal gun.

Give it a rest boy, my ribs are aching from the laughter you're providing.

The 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries and 33,636 deaths would certain be reduced substantially by limiting the availability of firearms. The drug cartels, career criminals, and deranged mass murders would certainly find ways to arm themselves. However these people are not responsible for most of the gun violence.

The 22,000 suicide victims, the accidents and the shootings in fits of rage or under emotional stress would certainly be reduced considerable with less firearms.

No matter what this nation does with gun laws, people will still get shot, but it can certainly be reduced significantly if the nation is willing to restrict the availability of guns.

NAZI Germany , 6,000,000 Individuals gassed and incinerated by their duly elected government:

FUCK YOU

.

Hitler had never won an election. He lost the 1932 presidential election. Became chancellery then ceased power after the burning of the Reichstag. Hitler banned all parties other than the Nazi Party. Thus there were no free elections till after the WWII. There was no duly elected government in Nazi Germany.

Misleading. Hitler won a plurality of the vote. He didn't win an outright majority, but he got the most votes and formed a government. Clearly he was "duly elected." Saying he wasn't is ignorant. There are more than two parties in European countries. To say that their governments are not duly elected because they need to form multi-party governments is nonsense

 

[kaz]

The 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries and 33,636 deaths would certain be reduced substantially by limiting the availability of firearms. The drug cartels, career criminals, and deranged mass murders would certainly find ways to arm themselves. However these people are not responsible for most of the gun violence.

The 22,000 suicide victims, the accidents and the shootings in fits of rage or under emotional stress would certainly be reduced considerable with less firearms.

No matter what this nation does with gun laws, people will still get shot, but it can certainly be reduced significantly if the nation is willing to restrict the availability of guns.

Ban anything and you reduce their risks. So?

Ban cars, or reduce their top speed to 20 and you reduce deaths to nearly zero.

The point is, a murderous animal doesn’t care what the tool is, they simply want to kill. And there are far more effective ways to kill then an AR.

The most appropriate gun depends on the target and location.

In general, guns are very effective ways to kill. That's what they are designed to do. They are easily available, relatively easy to use, and don't require the skills of knife fighting, marital arts, or bomb making. The gun is the perfect weapon for the weak of body and mind and the coward. It is the perfect weapon for killing unarmed children and adults from close up to far away.

Cowards?

Ok, your wife is attacked by three men who want to rape her.

I’m sure she’d appreciate the fact you think she was a coward for drawing her gun.

Yes, we are cowards for wanting to defend our own families. Flopper is a hero who would call the cops and plead for them to come direct traffic. Come fast! There's a real snarl up where his family is being murdered!

American gun owners are far more likely to injure themselves or someone else with their firearm than to stop a criminal. Even attempting to defend themselves or their family is rare. Purchasing a gun may help enrich the firearms industry, but the facts show it is unlikely to increase your personal safety. In fact, in a nation of more than 300 million firearms, it is striking how rarely guns are used in self-defense.

Using Guns In Self-Defense Is Rare, Study Finds | HuffPost

You're an idiot. That's ridiculous. You're someone who needs to pry yourself away from fake news. And your statement on using guns in self defense being rare is based on the intellectually lazy position of ignoring when shots are NOT fired.

And it doesn't in any way justify government restricting our rights, much less our Constitutional rights.

Seriously, your argument is government is restricting our rights because we aren't big boys enough to handle them. Oh, but government can handle guns. What a sad and pathetic human being you are that you would argue that way and that you would put your balls in a jar and mail them to Hillary

 

[kaz]

Ban anything and you reduce their risks. So?

Ban cars, or reduce their top speed to 20 and you reduce deaths to nearly zero.

The point is, a murderous animal doesn’t care what the tool is, they simply want to kill. And there are far more effective ways to kill then an AR.

The most appropriate gun depends on the target and location.

In general, guns are very effective ways to kill. That's what they are designed to do. They are easily available, relatively easy to use, and don't require the skills of knife fighting, marital arts, or bomb making. The gun is the perfect weapon for the weak of body and mind and the coward. It is the perfect weapon for killing unarmed children and adults from close up to far away.

Cowards?

Ok, your wife is attacked by three men who want to rape her.

I’m sure she’d appreciate the fact you think she was a coward for drawing her gun.

Yes, we are cowards for wanting to defend our own families. Flopper is a hero who would call the cops and plead for them to come direct traffic. Come fast! There's a real snarl up where his family is being murdered!

American gun owners are far more likely to injure themselves or someone else with their firearm than to stop a criminal. Even attempting to defend themselves or their family is rare. Purchasing a gun may help enrich the firearms industry, but the facts show it is unlikely to increase your personal safety. In fact, in a nation of more than 300 million firearms, it is striking how rarely guns are used in self-defense.

Using Guns In Self-Defense Is Rare, Study Finds | HuffPost

You seem to have missed the point that the reason they are rare is that criminals must accept the possibility that their prey may be armed.

More directly, Flopper is only counting the minority of incidents where shots are fired. If you show your gun and the aggressor backs down, Flopper doesn't think that counts as using a gun for self defense even though that happens far more than actual shootings. He's wrong. He usually is. He's been binge watching Fake News since he lost the election

 

[westwall]

Try again. Long, long, long before ANY guns form the USA got to Latin America that murder rate existed.

No, it didn't actually. The murder rate only started soaring in the 80's because we were fueling a counter-revolutionary fascist uprising in multiple Latin American countries like Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, Panama, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua.

Remember the Contras? That was all you guys and Reagan who did that shit. You're the ones who created all that instability in Latin America because you were waging half-brained, corrupt and covert wars, funded by drug money, against Socialists and Communists who posed no threat to anything other than narrow private business interests. Remember who raped those nuns in Latin America? It was the same people you armed to fight the Communists. YOU and your shitty Conservatism are responsible for the instability in Central America. YOU created that chaos when YOU supported and funded fascist and authoritarian strongmen like the Contras, like Noriega, like the Guatemalan death squads. You gave them guns. You flooded them with guns...guns you gave them in exchange for drugs which you brought into the US, turned into crack, and flooded the minority communities with in order to enrich private prison companies and empower police to come down hard on those communities with mass incarceration.

Latin America isn't inherently crime-ridden...YOU made it that way when YOU supported and encouraged a covert CIA war, funded by drug money, that flooded the region with US guns.

Try looking at the crime rates from the 1800's. I know, that would require you to actually read some HISTORY, but the source material is readily available and it shows that Latin America has ALWAYS had a grotesquely high murder rate. As far back as written records go.

 

[kaz]

I've already addressed that

No you haven't. Not at all. Not even close. Not one word.

From ABC News, January 25th, 2013:

'Hot' Guns Fueling Crime, US Study Says
An estimated 230,000 guns per year are stolen in home burglaries and property crimes, according to a study by the Department of Justice.​

This is your argument and you've produced so far zero links. It's your time to do some research to back up your argument, boy chick

I've done the research, it's you who lacks any research skills.

Here's the derps problem.

He thinks getting rid of legal ownership will somehow limit those with criminal intent from getting guns.

Do you realize Derp (and god that is an incredibly appropriate name), that there actually are manufacturers outside the united states? and that criminals really don't care if they follow import/export laws. And you do know that just about any highly trained machinist can make a really good gun. Hell, soon you'll be able to 3D print a reasonably lethal gun.

Give it a rest boy, my ribs are aching from the laughter you're providing.

The 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries and 33,636 deaths would certain be reduced substantially by limiting the availability of firearms. The drug cartels, career criminals, and deranged mass murders would certainly find ways to arm themselves. However these people are not responsible for most of the gun violence.

The 22,000 suicide victims, the accidents and the shootings in fits of rage or under emotional stress would certainly be reduced considerable with less firearms.

No matter what this nation does with gun laws, people will still get shot, but it can certainly be reduced significantly if the nation is willing to restrict the availability of guns.

NAZI Germany , 6,000,000 Individuals gassed and incinerated by their duly elected government:

FUCK YOU

.

After 20,000 "responsible gun owners" voted to nominate a Nazi as the Republican candidate in IL just a couple weeks ago, YOU NO LONGER GET TO INVOKE HITLER IN YOUR ARGUMENTS.

Ouch, and derp goes down hard, derp, derp. He's getting his ass handed to him and he knows it. So to lay down flak while he makes his escape, he throws out, you're a Nazi!!!

Derp, derp, do tell, derp, derp ...

 

[kaz]

You're making that up. The UK has far fewer guns and a suicide rate roughly equal to ours. People don't need a gun if they want to kill themselves, moron.

So then why give them the option? If people are the problem, why is your only solution to let the problem buy guns?

Maybe you could turn that into a coherent argument rather than throw out "why give them that option" as if that justifies eliminating guns, derp, derp.

Derp, derp, derp, let's eliminate cars, it eliminates the option of people driving off cliffs! Derp, derp ...

Moron

 

[kaz]

It's the price of living in a free country.

I didn't agree to that bargain. No one did. It's a bargain you're thrusting upon us because your fetish means more to you than your own life.

Every gun you bring into your home adds to the supply of guns criminals get to use in crimes.

No, derp, derp, you didn't. You want an authoritarian leftists government, not a free one, derp. Derp, derp, derp ...

 

[Pop23]

No you haven't. Not at all. Not even close. Not one word.

From ABC News, January 25th, 2013:

'Hot' Guns Fueling Crime, US Study Says
An estimated 230,000 guns per year are stolen in home burglaries and property crimes, according to a study by the Department of Justice.​

I've done the research, it's you who lacks any research skills.

Here's the derps problem.

He thinks getting rid of legal ownership will somehow limit those with criminal intent from getting guns.

Do you realize Derp (and god that is an incredibly appropriate name), that there actually are manufacturers outside the united states? and that criminals really don't care if they follow import/export laws. And you do know that just about any highly trained machinist can make a really good gun. Hell, soon you'll be able to 3D print a reasonably lethal gun.

Give it a rest boy, my ribs are aching from the laughter you're providing.

The 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries and 33,636 deaths would certain be reduced substantially by limiting the availability of firearms. The drug cartels, career criminals, and deranged mass murders would certainly find ways to arm themselves. However these people are not responsible for most of the gun violence.

The 22,000 suicide victims, the accidents and the shootings in fits of rage or under emotional stress would certainly be reduced considerable with less firearms.

No matter what this nation does with gun laws, people will still get shot, but it can certainly be reduced significantly if the nation is willing to restrict the availability of guns.

NAZI Germany , 6,000,000 Individuals gassed and incinerated by their duly elected government:

FUCK YOU

.

After 20,000 "responsible gun owners" voted to nominate a Nazi as the Republican candidate in IL just a couple weeks ago, YOU NO LONGER GET TO INVOKE HITLER IN YOUR ARGUMENTS.

Ouch, and derp goes down hard, derp, derp. He's getting his ass handed to him and he knows it. So to lay down flak while he makes his escape, he throws out, you're a Nazi!!!

Derp, derp, do tell, derp, derp ...

Life has been so mush more pleasant since I put that dude on my ignore list. Only the third person ever. Like preparation H for a hemorrhoid.

 

[kaz]

Yes, we are cowards for wanting to defend our own families.

Your gun isn't going to defend your family. More likely, you will lose it or it will be stolen from you, and there's less than a 90% chance you will even tell the police if that happens. All you're doing by bringing a gun into your home is adding to the supply of guns from which criminals will steal. 230,000 are stolen every year. In the time it took me to write this response, between 2 and 3 guns have just been stolen.

Gun ownership is a disease of body and mind. It's an act of selfishness and recklessness that only contributes to crime, it doesn't stop or deter it.

You have a T-Shirt that says I'm with stupid and an arrow that points down, don't you? Derp, derp, derp derp ...