Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[frigidweirdo]

Sorry moron..

I knew it was there, I knew you'd revert to insulting at some point, it had to happen, you hardly have an argument, most of it is based on what you want to believe.

I'm out with you, if you really need to start insulting me, well, I just say bye.

And I have grown tired of dealing with people who can't read simple English, want to deny people the right to self defense, and then act insulted when I call them by their behavior.........

Yeah, you just tell yourself that this is what I've said. Delusion isn't great, but it keeps some people going.

 

[2aguy]

Sorry moron..

I knew it was there, I knew you'd revert to insulting at some point, it had to happen, you hardly have an argument, most of it is based on what you want to believe.

I'm out with you, if you really need to start insulting me, well, I just say bye.

And I have grown tired of dealing with people who can't read simple English, want to deny people the right to self defense, and then act insulted when I call them by their behavior.........

Yeah, you just tell yourself that this is what I've said. Delusion isn't great, but it keeps some people going.

You should get help with your delusions....many with your views are quite delusional, they have a hard time understanding the truth, reality, right and wrong, and good and evil......you can't help it....but you could work on it....

 

[kaz]

You think the EU is going to fight Russia over the Baltics without the US? Dream on

Why not? The EU is larger than the US and Russia. The US would probably jump on board, but the EU would make the decision regardless.

Suurreee they would. They can't even defend themselves without us. What difference does the number of people in the country make?

Why would you think they can't defend themselves?

US Military active manpower 1.3 million.
EU Military active manpower 1.5 million.

Both have about 8,000 tanks, for example.

They don't have the balls............you can have all the tanks and guns you want but you need to actually have men and women ready to fight.....the E.U. welfare kids will only fight when the tanks are rolling into their internet cafes......

Yes, Europe fighting Russia over the Baltics with the US is a long shot, without us it's zero

 

[kaz]

ALoveSupreme
Hey ALove, maybe you're the liberal who can finally answer the question. How exactly are you going to keep guns from criminals when any kid can get all the pot they want? What's your plan?

You seem fixated in asking loaded questions, over and over. Then pounding your chest claiming some sort of victory when no one responds; in fact it is one, a Pyrrhic one. No one can answer this question with any certainty, and knowing this you are obsessed in echoing yourself - making you look like the fool I know you to be.

Are you familiar with the term Mens rea? Do you know there is generally no way 'see' or discover a guilty mind until a guilty act (actus reus) is perpetrated?

Of course one might postulate that everyone who owns a gun has established Mens rea and simply needs the right circumstance to kill. Then it's up to the Corner's Inquest to decide the cause of death - At the hands of another, justifiable, accidental, etc.

Then a detective/inspector will join with Prosecutor's office to further investigate the matter if the coroner's examination so warrants, Keep this in mind gun nutters, your comments made on the Internet may one day come back to bite you in a court of law.

The POINT is criminals will ALWAYS find a way to get a gun... BECAUSE THERE CRIMINALS. The Point is should NON CRIMINALS have the right to have a gun to protect themselves and their family from them. Logical, ethical, commonsense (non liberal) answer is YES.
View attachment 45010


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks! Amazing no matter how many times you point out to liberals that honest citizens follow the law and criminals don't, they don't grasp it. Buy an illegal gun? A criminal wouldn't do that, would they? Yeah...

 

[kaz]

ALoveSupreme
Hey ALove, maybe you're the liberal who can finally answer the question. How exactly are you going to keep guns from criminals when any kid can get all the pot they want? What's your plan?

You seem fixated in asking loaded questions, over and over. Then pounding your chest claiming some sort of victory when no one responds; in fact it is one, a Pyrrhic one. No one can answer this question with any certainty, and knowing this you are obsessed in echoing yourself - making you look like the fool I know you to be.

Are you familiar with the term Mens rea? Do you know there is generally no way 'see' or discover a guilty mind until a guilty act (actus reus) is perpetrated?

Of course one might postulate that everyone who owns a gun has established Mens rea and simply needs the right circumstance to kill. Then it's up to the Corner's Inquest to decide the cause of death - At the hands of another, justifiable, accidental, etc.

Then a detective/inspector will join with Prosecutor's office to further investigate the matter if the coroner's examination so warrants, Keep this in mind gun nutters, your comments made on the Internet may one day come back to bite you in a court of law.

The POINT is criminals will ALWAYS find a way to get a gun... BECAUSE THERE CRIMINALS. The Point is should NON CRIMINALS have the right to have a gun to protect themselves and their family from them. Logical, ethical, commonsense (non liberal) answer is YES.
View attachment 45010


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've never disagreed with your statement, "NON CRIMINALS have the right to have a gun to protect themselves and their family from them". I've posted several times sober and sane citizens have the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun.

I don't believe anyone convicted of domestic violence, stalking or making criminal threats, or convicted of battery, sexual battery, child or animal abuse, or ever detained as a danger to themselves or others, or convicted of felony driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol should be in possession of a gun ever.

The problem with this thread is M14 and other liars who constantly build straw men.

Rational people believe gun controls are necessary to mitigate gun violence in America.,

Dude, you are the one who keeps building straw men, you keep saying they are saying that criminals can have guns, when we keep telling you that rights, including the right to have guns, can be limited with ... wait for it ... due process of law. Still haven't seen you process that.

You also keep evading the point that a gun at home because it's illegal to carry with you when you are being shot at is not having a gun. See the Washington Navy yard where ... military ... people were prohibited from having guns. The gunman went to where guns weren't allowed, killed the one guy who could have a gun first (the security guard), then opened fire on unarmed people. Yeah, a coincidence. Just like the overwhelming pattern of mass shootings in gun free zones: Sandy Hood, Aurora, Virginia Tech, Columbine, ...

 

[kaz]

ALoveSupreme
Hey ALove, maybe you're the liberal who can finally answer the question. How exactly are you going to keep guns from criminals when any kid can get all the pot they want? What's your plan?

You seem fixated in asking loaded questions, over and over. Then pounding your chest claiming some sort of victory when no one responds; in fact it is one, a Pyrrhic one. No one can answer this question with any certainty, and knowing this you are obsessed in echoing yourself - making you look like the fool I know you to be.

Are you familiar with the term Mens rea? Do you know there is generally no way 'see' or discover a guilty mind until a guilty act (actus reus) is perpetrated?

Of course one might postulate that everyone who owns a gun has established Mens rea and simply needs the right circumstance to kill. Then it's up to the Corner's Inquest to decide the cause of death - At the hands of another, justifiable, accidental, etc.

Then a detective/inspector will join with Prosecutor's office to further investigate the matter if the coroner's examination so warrants, Keep this in mind gun nutters, your comments made on the Internet may one day come back to bite you in a court of law.

The POINT is criminals will ALWAYS find a way to get a gun... BECAUSE THERE CRIMINALS. The Point is should NON CRIMINALS have the right to have a gun to protect themselves and their family from them. Logical, ethical, commonsense (non liberal) answer is YES.
View attachment 45010


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

People with guns need to protect each other . It's a bitter self fulfilling cycle.

So the problem isn't criminals with guns, it's people trying to protect themselves from the people with guns? Is that seriously what you just said?

 

[kaz]

You think the EU is going to fight Russia over the Baltics without the US? Dream on

Why not? The EU is larger than the US and Russia. The US would probably jump on board, but the EU would make the decision regardless.

Suurreee they would. They can't even defend themselves without us. What difference does the number of people in the country make?

Why would you think they can't defend themselves?

US Military active manpower 1.3 million.
EU Military active manpower 1.5 million.

Both have about 8,000 tanks, for example.

They don't have the balls............you can have all the tanks and guns you want but you need to actually have men and women ready to fight.....the E.U. welfare kids will only fight when the tanks are rolling into their internet cafes......

This sounds like the sort of high school "my dad's better than your dad" sort of nonsense.

You don't follow European politics

 

[kaz]

I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals

I'm hardly a liberal, but I'm going to answer anyway.
I would introduce one gun law:

If you commit a violent crime using, or whilst holding a firearm (or any of your 'crew' having one - including replicas), you get the death by firing squad with no chance of reprieve, that sentence to be carried out within 24 hours of conviction.

People who use guns for crime will get rare after the first few lots get what they deserve.
Once you've shown the criminals what's going to happen to them, there will be no further need to carry guns outside sporting purposes.

All problems solved, save the hearing problems and headaches caused by listening to the lefties and churches whining about the sanctity of life.

Locking up criminals has worked pretty well, that's been the one effective strategy

 

[frigidweirdo]

Sorry moron..

I knew it was there, I knew you'd revert to insulting at some point, it had to happen, you hardly have an argument, most of it is based on what you want to believe.

I'm out with you, if you really need to start insulting me, well, I just say bye.

And I have grown tired of dealing with people who can't read simple English, want to deny people the right to self defense, and then act insulted when I call them by their behavior.........

Yeah, you just tell yourself that this is what I've said. Delusion isn't great, but it keeps some people going.

You should get help with your delusions....many with your views are quite delusional, they have a hard time understanding the truth, reality, right and wrong, and good and evil......you can't help it....but you could work on it....

Thing is, I back up what I say. You say stuff, and I prove it wrong. You merely disappear and come back a week later saying the same nonsense and hoping now one will prove it wrong again. Flimsy logic is not logic. You take random quotes from places and without thinking about how they relate to the world, you use them, and you get it wrong almost every time, without fail.

The worst of all is that you actually used a source that you claimed backed you up, when it didn't do that because you didn't even bother to read your own source. It's amazing.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why not? The EU is larger than the US and Russia. The US would probably jump on board, but the EU would make the decision regardless.

Suurreee they would. They can't even defend themselves without us. What difference does the number of people in the country make?

Why would you think they can't defend themselves?

US Military active manpower 1.3 million.
EU Military active manpower 1.5 million.

Both have about 8,000 tanks, for example.

They don't have the balls............you can have all the tanks and guns you want but you need to actually have men and women ready to fight.....the E.U. welfare kids will only fight when the tanks are rolling into their internet cafes......

This sounds like the sort of high school "my dad's better than your dad" sort of nonsense.

You don't follow European politics

Is that a statement or a question?

If it's a statement, I'd ask how you would know.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Thanks! Amazing no matter how many times you point out to liberals that honest citizens follow the law and criminals don't, they don't grasp it. Buy an illegal gun? A criminal wouldn't do that, would they? Yeah...

Do they? Honest citizens break the law all the time, they just don't get caught.

 

[frigidweirdo]

[
Yes, Europe fighting Russia over the Baltics with the US is a long shot, without us it's zero

If Russia were to invade the EU would have no choice.

The funny thing is you seem to think that only the US would go to war, or take that initiative. Maybe Europe isn't so big on the whole invading other countries simply because they can. But then again if, say, the Falkland Islands got invaded, do you think the British would wait for the Americans? They didn't last time it happened, the US didn't help much at all.

 

[kaz]

[
Yes, Europe fighting Russia over the Baltics with the US is a long shot, without us it's zero

If Russia were to invade the EU would have no choice.

The funny thing is you seem to think that only the US would go to war, or take that initiative. Maybe Europe isn't so big on the whole invading other countries simply because they can. But then again if, say, the Falkland Islands got invaded, do you think the British would wait for the Americans? They didn't last time it happened, the US didn't help much at all.

I'm against Iraq, dumb ass. I'm also against nation building in Afghanistan, Libya, Kosovo and the rest of the wars started by both parties. You know that if you have long term memory.

And "no choice?" You mean like Ukraine who had a defense pact too so they had no choice? LOL, you are completely clueless about European politics. They couldn't agree on what kind of sandwich to have for lunch

 

[Indofred]

I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals

I'm hardly a liberal, but I'm going to answer anyway.
I would introduce one gun law:

If you commit a violent crime using, or whilst holding a firearm (or any of your 'crew' having one - including replicas), you get the death by firing squad with no chance of reprieve, that sentence to be carried out within 24 hours of conviction.

People who use guns for crime will get rare after the first few lots get what they deserve.
Once you've shown the criminals what's going to happen to them, there will be no further need to carry guns outside sporting purposes.

All problems solved, save the hearing problems and headaches caused by listening to the lefties and churches whining about the sanctity of life.

I'm all for issuing judges in death penalty cases a .357 magnum.
"This court hear-by sentences you to death." BANG.

No way - The cleaners would have a hell of a job sorting the mess out.

 

[Indofred]

I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals

I'm hardly a liberal, but I'm going to answer anyway.
I would introduce one gun law:

If you commit a violent crime using, or whilst holding a firearm (or any of your 'crew' having one - including replicas), you get the death by firing squad with no chance of reprieve, that sentence to be carried out within 24 hours of conviction.

People who use guns for crime will get rare after the first few lots get what they deserve.
Once you've shown the criminals what's going to happen to them, there will be no further need to carry guns outside sporting purposes.

All problems solved, save the hearing problems and headaches caused by listening to the lefties and churches whining about the sanctity of life.

Locking up criminals has worked pretty well, that's been the one effective strategy

Ner - shoot the bastards - cheaper and no repeat offences.

 

[danielpalos]

Sorry moron..

I knew it was there, I knew you'd revert to insulting at some point, it had to happen, you hardly have an argument, most of it is based on what you want to believe.

I'm out with you, if you really need to start insulting me, well, I just say bye.

And I have grown tired of dealing with people who can't read simple English, want to deny people the right to self defense, and then act insulted when I call them by their behavior.........

Only the clueless and the Causeless on the Right have a problem with reading comprehension while resorting to Only fallacies and claiming they are for the "gospel Truth".

Natural Rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions; literally:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

 

[kaz]

I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals

I'm hardly a liberal, but I'm going to answer anyway.
I would introduce one gun law:

If you commit a violent crime using, or whilst holding a firearm (or any of your 'crew' having one - including replicas), you get the death by firing squad with no chance of reprieve, that sentence to be carried out within 24 hours of conviction.

People who use guns for crime will get rare after the first few lots get what they deserve.
Once you've shown the criminals what's going to happen to them, there will be no further need to carry guns outside sporting purposes.

All problems solved, save the hearing problems and headaches caused by listening to the lefties and churches whining about the sanctity of life.

Locking up criminals has worked pretty well, that's been the one effective strategy

Ner - shoot the bastards - cheaper and no repeat offences.

No, death penalty cases no cost far more than life in prison. The only way to make it cheaper is to get the population overwhelmingly in favor of it, and that's not going to happen

 

[kaz]

Sorry moron..

I knew it was there, I knew you'd revert to insulting at some point, it had to happen, you hardly have an argument, most of it is based on what you want to believe.

I'm out with you, if you really need to start insulting me, well, I just say bye.

And I have grown tired of dealing with people who can't read simple English, want to deny people the right to self defense, and then act insulted when I call them by their behavior.........

Only the clueless and the Causeless on the Right have a problem with reading comprehension while resorting to Only fallacies and claiming they are for the "gospel Truth".

Natural Rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions; literally:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

I like grapefruit, but it can be kind of sour and I don't like too much sugar, it can be a trick to get the right balance. but it's sure good when you do

 

[kaz]

How seriously can we take the clueless and Causeless Right, when they appeal to ignorance instead of working hard to acquire and possess a Constitutional clue and a Constitutional Cause.

hammer

 

[kaz]

Everything you post is trolling.

Nothing but diversion, Person on the clueless and Causeless and socially lazy Right?

"Nothing but diversion, Person on the clueless and Causeless and socially lazy Right?"

Yes, you probably are

I've wasted enough time on you, troll.

bye

Damn Will! I thought you were talking to yourself. I put the idiot on ignore long ago.

Here is the Operative statement from Judge Story's discourse: How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization it is difficult to see.

It is clearly legislated as the Intent and Purpose by the legislators.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State

Do you like rhubarb? I love a good rhubarb pie