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

[Conservative65]

See post 6128
Still waiting for your responses to the topics linked therein.
Non sequitur; that the 2nd allows some restrictions in no way means it allows the restrictions you mention here.

That said....
You and I both know you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of these things.
Absent the sound illustration of that necessity, there is no sound argument for their constitutionality.

Your opinions aren't persuasive. Given your fetish for guns, nothing you write on the topic is done without bias.

Now that you admit the Second does allow some restrictions, i.e. infringements, something I've argued before, you then try to equivocate your own statement.

That ^^^ really is quite funny.

The rule is licensing is acceptable (by your own statement), and the exception to the rule simply proves the rule that licensing is acceptable.

Yes pervert, anyone who thinks the second amendment protects the right to own a gun has a "fetish."

Is that true of other Constitutional rights too? Believing in free speech and search warrants means you have a "fetish?" Or is that just guns?

Wrong again asshole, "Fetishistic disorder is a mental health condition that centers on the employment of inanimate objects as a source of sexual satisfaction or the fulfillment of sexual fantasies or urges."

Clearly your life is focused on no one interfering with the satisfaction of playing with your guns. Why else do you spend hours defending an inanimate object, particularly one which has inflicted misery and death on innocent victims too often in the past decade.

Clearly you, in typical Liberal fashion, claim to know more about people than they know about themselves. Seems Liberals spend hours upon hours fantasizing how they can go about keeping people from owning guns. Sounds like a fetish to me.

Clearly you're incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed to believe a person with an open mind and seeking solutions to age old problems is out of step with our Constitution and traditional American ethos.

Everyone judges people, by their appearance, use of language and demeanor and I have judged you as poorly educated, brainwashed and either willfully ignorant or dumb.

You claim to be a conservative simply to have a sense of belonging, that is pitiful but not uncommon.

I've learned that Liberal idiots like you call anything you believe as open minded and anyone that disagrees closed minded.

Since your opinion about me is worth less than shit in a ni66er's back yard, I'll let you figure out what it means to me.

You support Hillary based on what's between her legs and Obama due to skin color.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I have no duty to answer anything you ask of me. To put your loaded and stupid questions to rest:

The Right to vote is restricted to those who are registered; we needed three amendments to the Constitution to force some States to do the right thing. Some, with Right Wing control still work to suppress this right.

What is loaded about my question? You confirmed it right after you said it's loaded. My question is directly related to what you just said, you said, "The Right to vote is restricted to those who are registered."

Name another right that you must be "registered" as well as licensed and pay a fee to have that right? Or, explain why this right is different than other rights? What is possibly unclear to you about that other than that you're a sniveling, cowardly bitch who won't man up to your own argument?

Thanks so much for sharing, you may now claim I've runaway. In reality I will be taking my 93 year old dad to the VA, but I know reality exists between your ears alone, in that dark cavern titled, "it's all about me"

While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

 

[M14 Shooter]

See post 6128
Still waiting for your responses to the topics linked therein.
Non sequitur; that the 2nd allows some restrictions in no way means it allows the restrictions you mention here.

That said....
You and I both know you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of these things.
Absent the sound illustration of that necessity, there is no sound argument for their constitutionality.

Your opinions aren't persuasive. Given your fetish for guns, nothing you write on the topic is done without bias.

Now that you admit the Second does allow some restrictions, i.e. infringements, something I've argued before, you then try to equivocate your own statement.

That ^^^ really is quite funny.

The rule is licensing is acceptable (by your own statement), and the exception to the rule simply proves the rule that licensing is acceptable.

Yes pervert, anyone who thinks the second amendment protects the right to own a gun has a "fetish."

Is that true of other Constitutional rights too? Believing in free speech and search warrants means you have a "fetish?" Or is that just guns?

Wrong again asshole, "Fetishistic disorder is a mental health condition that centers on the employment of inanimate objects as a source of sexual satisfaction or the fulfillment of sexual fantasies or urges."

Clearly your life is focused on no one interfering with the satisfaction of playing with your guns. Why else do you spend hours defending an inanimate object, particularly one which has inflicted misery and death on innocent victims too often in the past decade.

Clearly you, in typical Liberal fashion, claim to know more about people than they know about themselves. Seems Liberals spend hours upon hours fantasizing how they can go about keeping people from owning guns. Sounds like a fetish to me.

Clearly you're incapable of independent though....

Says the guy who can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[kaz]

I have no duty to answer anything you ask of me. To put your loaded and stupid questions to rest:

The Right to vote is restricted to those who are registered; we needed three amendments to the Constitution to force some States to do the right thing. Some, with Right Wing control still work to suppress this right.

What is loaded about my question? You confirmed it right after you said it's loaded. My question is directly related to what you just said, you said, "The Right to vote is restricted to those who are registered."

Name another right that you must be "registered" as well as licensed and pay a fee to have that right? Or, explain why this right is different than other rights? What is possibly unclear to you about that other than that you're a sniveling, cowardly bitch who won't man up to your own argument?

Thanks so much for sharing, you may now claim I've runaway. In reality I will be taking my 93 year old dad to the VA, but I know reality exists between your ears alone, in that dark cavern titled, "it's all about me"

While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

It's all about me? WTF are you talking about? I am asking you a simple question. You keep dropping your pants to prove there is nothing inside them. I got it, there is nothing in your pants, you can stop proving it.

The question is, Name another right that you must be "registered" as well as licensed and pay a fee to have that right? Or, explain why this right is different than other rights? What is possibly unclear to you about that other than that you're a sniveling, cowardly bitch who won't man up to your own argument?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Everyone judges people, by their appearance, use of language and demeanor and I have judged you as poorly educated, brainwashed and either willfully ignorant or dumb.

Yes... and your demonstrated inability to argue from anything other than emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty can only lead thinking people to conclude that you, along with all the other anti-gun loons, are simply another village useful idiot.

 

[Ernie S.]

See post 6128
Still waiting for your responses to the topics linked therein.
Non sequitur; that the 2nd allows some restrictions in no way means it allows the restrictions you mention here.

That said....
You and I both know you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of these things.
Absent the sound illustration of that necessity, there is no sound argument for their constitutionality.

Your opinions aren't persuasive. Given your fetish for guns, nothing you write on the topic is done without bias.

Now that you admit the Second does allow some restrictions, i.e. infringements, something I've argued before, you then try to equivocate your own statement.

That ^^^ really is quite funny.

The rule is licensing is acceptable (by your own statement), and the exception to the rule simply proves the rule that licensing is acceptable.

Yes pervert, anyone who thinks the second amendment protects the right to own a gun has a "fetish."

Is that true of other Constitutional rights too? Believing in free speech and search warrants means you have a "fetish?" Or is that just guns?

Wrong again asshole, "Fetishistic disorder is a mental health condition that centers on the employment of inanimate objects as a source of sexual satisfaction or the fulfillment of sexual fantasies or urges."

Clearly your life is focused on no one interfering with the satisfaction of playing with your guns. Why else do you spend hours defending an inanimate object, particularly one which has inflicted misery and death on innocent victims too often in the past decade.

Clearly you, in typical Liberal fashion, claim to know more about people than they know about themselves. Seems Liberals spend hours upon hours fantasizing how they can go about keeping people from owning guns. Sounds like a fetish to me.

Clearly you're incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed to believe a person with an open mind and seeking solutions to age old problems is out of step with our Constitution and traditional American ethos.

Everyone judges people, by their appearance, use of language and demeanor and I have judged you as poorly educated, brainwashed and either willfully ignorant or dumb.

You claim to be a conservative simply to have a sense of belonging, that is pitiful but not uncommon.

Renaming solutions that have failed each time they have been tried will fail again.
All rehashing failed policy will do is turn a few law abiding citizens into criminals. It will do nothing to save lives or get guns away from criminals and it may just prevent a few people from defending their lives and property.
But HELL! It would look like you were sincere about cutting down on senseless murders and it will make liberals feel all warm and fuzzy.

 

[kaz]

Your opinions aren't persuasive. Given your fetish for guns, nothing you write on the topic is done without bias.

Now that you admit the Second does allow some restrictions, i.e. infringements, something I've argued before, you then try to equivocate your own statement.

That ^^^ really is quite funny.

The rule is licensing is acceptable (by your own statement), and the exception to the rule simply proves the rule that licensing is acceptable.

Yes pervert, anyone who thinks the second amendment protects the right to own a gun has a "fetish."

Is that true of other Constitutional rights too? Believing in free speech and search warrants means you have a "fetish?" Or is that just guns?

Wrong again asshole, "Fetishistic disorder is a mental health condition that centers on the employment of inanimate objects as a source of sexual satisfaction or the fulfillment of sexual fantasies or urges."

Clearly your life is focused on no one interfering with the satisfaction of playing with your guns. Why else do you spend hours defending an inanimate object, particularly one which has inflicted misery and death on innocent victims too often in the past decade.

Clearly you, in typical Liberal fashion, claim to know more about people than they know about themselves. Seems Liberals spend hours upon hours fantasizing how they can go about keeping people from owning guns. Sounds like a fetish to me.

Clearly you're incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed to believe a person with an open mind and seeking solutions to age old problems is out of step with our Constitution and traditional American ethos.

Everyone judges people, by their appearance, use of language and demeanor and I have judged you as poorly educated, brainwashed and either willfully ignorant or dumb.

You claim to be a conservative simply to have a sense of belonging, that is pitiful but not uncommon.

Renaming solutions that have failed each time they have been tried will fail again.
All rehashing failed policy will do is turn a few law abiding citizens into criminals. It will do nothing to save lives or get guns away from criminals and it may just prevent a few people from defending their lives and property.
But HELL! It would look like you were sincere about cutting down on senseless murders and it will make liberals feel all warm and fuzzy.

Wry does have a good point when he points out we need to keep trying a system that isn't working rather than trying an actually different strategy, don't you think?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yes pervert, anyone who thinks the second amendment protects the right to own a gun has a "fetish."

Is that true of other Constitutional rights too? Believing in free speech and search warrants means you have a "fetish?" Or is that just guns?

Wrong again asshole, "Fetishistic disorder is a mental health condition that centers on the employment of inanimate objects as a source of sexual satisfaction or the fulfillment of sexual fantasies or urges."

Clearly your life is focused on no one interfering with the satisfaction of playing with your guns. Why else do you spend hours defending an inanimate object, particularly one which has inflicted misery and death on innocent victims too often in the past decade.

Clearly you, in typical Liberal fashion, claim to know more about people than they know about themselves. Seems Liberals spend hours upon hours fantasizing how they can go about keeping people from owning guns. Sounds like a fetish to me.

Clearly you're incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed to believe a person with an open mind and seeking solutions to age old problems is out of step with our Constitution and traditional American ethos.

Everyone judges people, by their appearance, use of language and demeanor and I have judged you as poorly educated, brainwashed and either willfully ignorant or dumb.

You claim to be a conservative simply to have a sense of belonging, that is pitiful but not uncommon.

Renaming solutions that have failed each time they have been tried will fail again.
All rehashing failed policy will do is turn a few law abiding citizens into criminals. It will do nothing to save lives or get guns away from criminals and it may just prevent a few people from defending their lives and property.
But HELL! It would look like you were sincere about cutting down on senseless murders and it will make liberals feel all warm and fuzzy.

Wry does have a good point when he points out we need to keep trying a system that isn't working rather than trying an actually different strategy, don't you think?

LOL, you actually asked Ernie what he thinks? That's hilarious, maybe you might ask Bert's opinion or even Stephanie's.

 

[kaz]

Wrong again asshole, "Fetishistic disorder is a mental health condition that centers on the employment of inanimate objects as a source of sexual satisfaction or the fulfillment of sexual fantasies or urges."

Clearly your life is focused on no one interfering with the satisfaction of playing with your guns. Why else do you spend hours defending an inanimate object, particularly one which has inflicted misery and death on innocent victims too often in the past decade.

Clearly you, in typical Liberal fashion, claim to know more about people than they know about themselves. Seems Liberals spend hours upon hours fantasizing how they can go about keeping people from owning guns. Sounds like a fetish to me.

Clearly you're incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed to believe a person with an open mind and seeking solutions to age old problems is out of step with our Constitution and traditional American ethos.

Everyone judges people, by their appearance, use of language and demeanor and I have judged you as poorly educated, brainwashed and either willfully ignorant or dumb.

You claim to be a conservative simply to have a sense of belonging, that is pitiful but not uncommon.

Renaming solutions that have failed each time they have been tried will fail again.
All rehashing failed policy will do is turn a few law abiding citizens into criminals. It will do nothing to save lives or get guns away from criminals and it may just prevent a few people from defending their lives and property.
But HELL! It would look like you were sincere about cutting down on senseless murders and it will make liberals feel all warm and fuzzy.

Wry does have a good point when he points out we need to keep trying a system that isn't working rather than trying an actually different strategy, don't you think?

LOL, you actually asked Ernie what he thinks? That's hilarious, maybe you might ask Bert's opinion or even Stephanie's.

Ernie's a pretty straight shooting guy, pun intended. You, not so much

 

[kaz]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

 

[Wry Catcher]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?
Guns killed how many people in the Unites States in a year?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/16/16547690-just-the-facts-gun-violence-in-america?lite

Now, shall we discuss mass murder in the United States?

If anyone's thinking is flawed, it is yours.

 

[kaz]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?
Guns killed how many people in the Unites States in a year?

Just the facts: Gun violence in America - U.S. News

Now, shall we discuss mass murder in the United States?

If anyone's thinking is flawed, it is yours.

No one can miss a point like you can. The point is, they got guns. Criminals can get them too. France has your laws and they got the guns. This isn't terror versus other criminals, this is that gun laws don't work for either.

Again, and France has the extremely restrictive gun laws already in place you want, and over 500 people were attacked without being able to defend themselves.

Your plan didn't work. Over 500 freaking people, how many would have been saved if they were allowed to defend themselves?

And again YOUR PLAN DIDN'T WORK. Is there any processing going on in your brain. Can you hear this. YOUR PLANT DIDN'T WORK.

Terrorists got guns ... lots of them ... Their victims followed the law. Here's a thought, YOUR PLAN DIDN'T WORK.

 

[TemplarKormac]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?
Guns killed how many people in the Unites States in a year?

Just the facts: Gun violence in America - U.S. News

Now, shall we discuss mass murder in the United States?

If anyone's thinking is flawed, it is yours.

LOL. Not this again.

To date 11,497 people have died this year via gun violence. The US Population is 318.9 million (estimated). You do the math.

But your dishonesty knows no bounds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html

 

[kaz]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?
Guns killed how many people in the Unites States in a year?

Just the facts: Gun violence in America - U.S. News

Now, shall we discuss mass murder in the United States?

If anyone's thinking is flawed, it is yours.

LOL. Not this again.

To date 11,497 people have died this year via gun violence. The US Population is 318.9 million (estimated). You do the math.

But your dishonesty knows no bounds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html

whatever he needs to deflect from the real message in Paris.

wry's laws don't work, they don't keep guns from criminals, they only keep guns from victims.. Leftists are soulless bastards. Sssshhhhhh..........

 

[kaz]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?
Guns killed how many people in the Unites States in a year?

Just the facts: Gun violence in America - U.S. News

Now, shall we discuss mass murder in the United States?

If anyone's thinking is flawed, it is yours.

So be specific on this. How do terrorists get all the guns they want, and yet you hold to that other criminals can't?

 

[Wry Catcher]

So more guns = less carnage. Does that summarize the thinking of those above?

Consider if you will untrained citizens at a crowded event, many armed and some of those stoned or high. Even those sober and well practiced in the use of a firearm, having no intel, will likely do what they need to do to survive..

Thus they become targets of each other, targeting anyone with a gun and increasing the carnage. When highly trained SWAT teams enter, they will engage those with guns. Friendly fire kills, just as easily as unfriendly fire.

 

[kaz]

So more guns = less carnage. Does that summarize the thinking of those above?

So you liked the system where only the terrorists had guns because it would have been worse if victims had them too. You are one ... sick ... fuck

Consider if you will untrained citizens at a crowded event, many armed and some of those stoned or high. Even those sober and well practiced in the use of a firearm, having no intel, will likely do what they need to do to survive..

Thus they become targets of each other, targeting anyone with a gun and increasing the carnage. When highly trained SWAT teams enter, they will engage those with guns. Friendly fire kills, just as easily as unfriendly fire.

OMG, you're right, 550 was a blessing! People fighting back would have made an unfortunate situation into a tragedy!!!!!

How are you going to keep guns from criminals, Wry?

Wry: Don't know

Why can terrorists get guns but criminals couldn't?

Wry: Don't know

Why can't the people who bring in drugs freely to this country bring in guns with them?

Wry: Don't know

Why would criminals not sell guns to criminals but they do to terrorists?

Wry: Don't know

Wry: How do you know my plan won't work if we don't fucking try it???

Wry: Why would we want people shooting back at shooters? Isn't the situation bad enough already!!!!!

 

[Sarah G]

Guys on a Message board don't have an answer on drafting a bill? Well that settles it...There is no solution if one cant be found here by gosh

The laws we already have could be better enforced like background checks and a waiting period even and especially for gun shows. Tougher sentencing for criminals who commit crimes with unregistered weapons if they can't confirm where they got the weapon.

Tougher regulation will go a long way in making sure the guns are registered and only used for what they say it will be used for.

These people here think everyone should just trust them as far as gun ownership, no question. I trust these particular gun owners as far as I can throw them and I'm a weak little thing despite that tractor tire tip pic I posted a couple of months ago.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?

In 2014, <8142 guns were used to murder someone.
>300,000,000 were not.
For every gun used to murder someone, >37,000 were not.
Your point, whatever it was, refuted.

 

[2aguy]

[
While I'm gone feel free to stroke the barrel of your gun, I'm sure doing that and day-dreaming about being a hero and killing a bad guy is the other way you spend your time.

Oops, there's apparently a flaw in your plan. Paris has the gun laws you want, how did this happen, Wry? You keep telling us that gun laws work. Yet 352 people were wounded or killed, they weren't able to defend themselves. Is that a problem? Or just the cost of doing business?

Guns killed how many people in the United States yesterday?
Guns killed how many people in the Unites States in a year?

Just the facts: Gun violence in America - U.S. News

Now, shall we discuss mass murder in the United States?

If anyone's thinking is flawed, it is yours.

Yeah...lawyers learn to never ask a question they don't know the answer to...you should learn that lesson....

Mass shootings in the U.S. the facts.....

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

Sooooo....


US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation



How many deaths on average according to Mother Jones...anti gun, uber left wing Mother Jones.......each year, well less than 100.

2014..... 9
2013..... 36
2012..... 72
2011..... 19
2010....9
2009...39
2008...18
2007...54
2006...21
2005...17
2004...5
2003...7
2002...not listed by mother jones
2001...5
2000...7

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf


Cars, Accidental deaths 2013......35,369

Poisons...accidental deaths 2013....38,851

Alcohol...accidental deaths 2013...29,001

gravity....accidental falling deaths 2013...30,208
Accidental drowning.....3,391
Accidental exposure to smoke, fire and flames.....2,760

Accidental gun deaths 2013......505


Those are the numbers of deaths from mass shootings in the United States.....and even in the big year, 2012, they didn't break 100 deaths by criminals.

How many guns are there in American hands....320 million.

How many people carry guns for self defense...over 13 million.