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

[kaz]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

So you think that the only purpose of shooting a projectile is to "kill." You are one ... sick ... fuck ...

Yeah, I'm sure guns were only invented for target practice. Speaking of sickness...

Again, the black and white leftist grasps only one option. Guns are only for killing or the are "only" for target practice. Let's face it, redskin, you are a stupid, stupid man, a complete simpleton

 

[TemplarKormac]

Q. Why do we license drivers, pilots, doctors and dentists, radio broadcasters, fisherman and hunters, attorney's and real estate sales personnel, those who sell cars, insurance and those who drive cabs, limos and school buses?

Why are they relevant to this discussion? That's like asking "Why is a polar bear white?"

 

[TemplarKormac]

Licensing does not make anyone a criminal, it does provide a level of protection to the general public (protecting the common defense and promoting the general welfare).

But in your case, you'll use licensing to label people of a certain inclination. It's not about protection, it's about labels and classification.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So why is there so much anger associated with efforts to reduce gun violence in the United States?

Is that really what you're after? The anger is focused on the unconstitutionality of the way you want to reduce gun violence. If you read the news instead of cherrypicking it, you'll notice that many of these people are nutcases.

The best way to reduce gun violence is focus on the mental health of the people, not using the "a nutcase with a gun killed a bunch of people" excuse to take away or restrict the gun rights of perfectly sane, law abiding individuals.

 

[kaz]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

So you think that the only purpose of shooting a projectile is to "kill." You are one ... sick ... fuck ...

Yeah, I'm sure guns were only invented for target practice. Speaking of sickness...

Of COURSE guns are undersigned to, among other things, kill other people. -- that's why our right to them is protected by the constitution,.

The idiocy is that for all the purposes guns serve, target practice, defense, hunting, collecting, etc., he's allowing us to pick only one. It's not worth trying to move past the stupidity that is our redskin friend

 

[TemplarKormac]

Your limitations sure handicap your efforts to write a cogent rebuttal to gun control regulations seeking to find a middle ground to mitigate gun violence in America.

We already have. But your inability to listen makes finding a middle ground difficult. A cogent rebuttal to gun control of any kind would be "fuck off."

However, since I'm trying to act like a gentleman, I'll put it to you this way:

There are certain restrictions we agree with, but we don't agree with more restrictions. We propose in counter that we see to the mental health of our citizens, minimize the chance of an unstable character getting his hands on a firearm instead of such a knee-jerk reaction.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Some form of gun control - or people control - seem rational, at least to rational people.

Ha! See what a little spelunking in a thread like this can do?

You stated clearly your case here. Wow. "People control"... what a concept.

 

[TemplarKormac]

72 pages and not one post by the gun grabbers addressing the Ops question.

631 by my count now, still the same. No real suggestions...

 

[kaz]

Which is worse - everyone screaming at a crowded concert or everyone shooting at a crowded concert? Shooting into those terrorist suicide vests packed full of explosives would be exciting.

which is better - screaming at someone trying to kill you or being able to shoot at them?

 

[kaz]

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.

they do all that and more in France, how'd that work out for you? It's the point we keep making

 

[kaz]

Q. Why do we license drivers, pilots, doctors and dentists, radio broadcasters, fisherman and hunters, attorney's and real estate sales personnel, those who sell cars, insurance and those who drive cabs, limos and school buses?

Why are they relevant to this discussion? That's like asking "Why is a polar bear white?"

Also, none of those are Constitutional rights

 

[kaz]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

Oh…so you are stupid about the 1st Amendment the same way you are stupid about the 2nd….thanks for clarifying your stupidity…..

You gun nutters are running on empty. Seriously.

Says the guy who supports the gun control measures that completely failed in France…...

Redskin's motto if fail spectacularly, fail often

 

[kaz]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

So you think that the only purpose of shooting a projectile is to "kill." You are one ... sick ... fuck ...

Yeah, I'm sure guns were only invented for target practice. Speaking of sickness...

So when does your plan start working?

So let me tell you about Kalamazoo (my home town, hence "kaz"). You go outside the city of Kalamazoo and try that shit and you're a dead man. But everyone knows you can't take guns into Kalamazoo, liberal college town. So where does the guy go? Where there are no guns!

So he goes around shooting people and no one shoots back. Just like Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora, the Washington Navy Yard, Virginia Tech ...

Does at some point it dawn on you morons to notice a pattern? Gun free zone, more victims?

 

[Wilbur Right]

You go outside the city of Kalamazoo and try that shit and you're a dead man. But everyone knows you can't take guns into Kalamazoo, liberal college town. So where does the guy go? Where there are no guns!

thats odd. I was just on the web site for the Sherrif department of Kalamazoo and there seemed to be the ability to purchase and carry a gun in Kalamazoo.

Even open carry is permitted. At least in MI.

 

[kaz]

You go outside the city of Kalamazoo and try that shit and you're a dead man. But everyone knows you can't take guns into Kalamazoo, liberal college town. So where does the guy go? Where there are no guns!

thats odd. I was just on the web site for the Sherrif department of Kalamazoo and there seemed to be the ability to purchase and carry a gun in Kalamazoo.

Even open carry is permitted. At least in MI.

I was speaking in general of the shootings. In Kalamazoo there is open carry so shooters know who can shoot back and take them out first or go somewhere else.

All your laws are reverse of logic

 

[Fishlore]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

So you think that the only purpose of shooting a projectile is to "kill." You are one ... sick ... fuck ...

Yeah, I'm sure guns were only invented for target practice. Speaking of sickness...

So when does your plan start working?

So let me tell you about Kalamazoo (my home town, hence "kaz"). You go outside the city of Kalamazoo and try that shit and you're a dead man. But everyone knows you can't take guns into Kalamazoo, liberal college town. So where does the guy go? Where there are no guns!

So he goes around shooting people and no one shoots back. Just like Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora, the Washington Navy Yard, Virginia Tech ...

Does at some point it dawn on you morons to notice a pattern? Gun free zone, more victims?

The assumption here is that had the father and son walking out the Cracker Barrel Restaurant in Kalamazoo yesterday been carrying the same sort of of semi-automatic pistols as the guy who killed them both in his random spree murder, they would have instantly dropped to the ground, drawn their weapons and returned devastating, heroic fire that would have ended the crime spree.

This is beyond stupid, which is probably why the gentleman posting his drivel calls those who disagree with him "you morons." It is something that even ten-year-olds understand happens only on TV. The pathetic grownups who put out these fantasies to justify their insane interpretation of the Second Amendment are co-dependent with the criminals and psychos who take the lives of thousands of innocent Americans every year. We, the People, who let these deluded gun fetishists get away with such murderous nonsense have our own share of responsibility as well.

 

[kaz]

The assumption here is that had the father and son walking out the Cracker Barrel Restaurant in Kalamazoo yesterday been carrying the same sort of of semi-automatic pistols as the guy who killed them both in his random spree murder, they would have instantly dropped to the ground, drawn their weapons and returned devastating, heroic fire that would have ended the crime spree

There is no such assumption, you're a fucking idiot. The idea here is that had the general law abiding population been allowed to better defend themselves, it would have been a lot more dangerous for the guy to kill as many people as he did. your strawman is just retarded. You're the 10 year old

 

[Arizona Willie]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

So you think that the only purpose of shooting a projectile is to "kill." You are one ... sick ... fuck ...

Yeah, I'm sure guns were only invented for target practice. Speaking of sickness...

So when does your plan start working?

So let me tell you about Kalamazoo (my home town, hence "kaz"). You go outside the city of Kalamazoo and try that shit and you're a dead man. But everyone knows you can't take guns into Kalamazoo, liberal college town. So where does the guy go? Where there are no guns!

So he goes around shooting people and no one shoots back. Just like Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora, the Washington Navy Yard, Virginia Tech ...

Does at some point it dawn on you morons to notice a pattern? Gun free zone, more victims?

The assumption here is that had the father and son walking out the Cracker Barrel Restaurant in Kalamazoo yesterday been carrying the same sort of of semi-automatic pistols as the guy who killed them both in his random spree murder, they would have instantly dropped to the ground, drawn their weapons and returned devastating, heroic fire that would have ended the crime spree.

This is beyond stupid, which is probably why the gentleman posting his drivel calls those who disagree with him "you morons." It is something that even ten-year-olds understand happens only on TV. The pathetic grownups who put out these fantasies to justify their insane interpretation of the Second Amendment are co-dependent with the criminals and psychos who take the lives of thousands of innocent Americans every year. We, the People, who let these deluded gun fetishists get away with such murderous nonsense have our own share of responsibility as well.

=====

Guns on TV.

Yeah you gotta love it when the criminals jump in a car and take off and the luscious female detective runs into the street and fires her snub nose 38 at the car traveling 100 mph two blocks away and hits the driver or one of the rear tires and JUSTICE TRIUMPS AGAIN.

 

[Ernie S.]

We need to license people who write books, use computers or use the internet…..just in case they might use their 1st Amendment rights to commit a crime…...

Only if their intended purpose is to kill.

So you think that the only purpose of shooting a projectile is to "kill." You are one ... sick ... fuck ...

Yeah, I'm sure guns were only invented for target practice. Speaking of sickness...

So when does your plan start working?

So let me tell you about Kalamazoo (my home town, hence "kaz"). You go outside the city of Kalamazoo and try that shit and you're a dead man. But everyone knows you can't take guns into Kalamazoo, liberal college town. So where does the guy go? Where there are no guns!

So he goes around shooting people and no one shoots back. Just like Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora, the Washington Navy Yard, Virginia Tech ...

Does at some point it dawn on you morons to notice a pattern? Gun free zone, more victims?

The pathetic grownups who put out these fantasies to justify their insane interpretation of the Second Amendment are co-dependent with the criminals and psychos who take the lives of thousands of innocent Americans every year.

Insane interpretation of the Second Amendment? What's to misinterpret. What part of "Shall not be infringed" are you having trouble wrapping your vacant skull around?

 

[longknife]