Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We have a lot of indian reservations here; there are very few who are being over-run by smokers. You're telling stories.
We also need to stigmatize guns; they really don't make you safer. If they did, we would have almost zero gun deaths per year since we have a gazillion guns in this nation.
Can we stigmatize doctors while we're at it? For every gun death in the US there are three death's from doctor's mistakes and there are a lot fewer doctors than there are guns and gun owners.
Do you have a source for that statistic?
One of the many good things about the ACA (as I understand it) is that the preventative healthcare emphasis will assist doctors in being able to track your health through decades of doctor visits. High blood pressure, for example, is damaging to your kidneys. If she/he can see that you've had hypertension since you were a kid, when you show up with a renal issue, the leading candidate won't be bladder cancer or liver issues....likely the hypertension they will be made aware of by reviewing your file.
I would like to have some sort of scoring system for Dr's. You can recite your favorite pitcher's ERA but do you know how many patients of your doctor improved their overall health after a year under their care?
Good idea.
See, it's working.
First it was cars, now pot seems to be the equation.
Pot is one of those rites of passage for kids. Many try; comparatively few relative to those who try continue use.
I'm hoping we make all gun crimes a federal crime; you use a gun (not fire it--just have it with you) while commiting a crime; soyanara for 10 years. Pretty authoratarian I suppose but I'll be happy to wear that bage for a safer society.
The assumption that the nurse who wants a gun will discover this yellow pages directing her to the alley where she can buy a gun, ignore the law she abides every day, and plunk down cold hard cash is nutty but that seems to be a common streak with gun nuts...
Most of whom insist they need a gun to kill the feds who are coming along any day now to confiscate said gun; all the while insisting that we never reduce funding for those same feds.
It's a strange dynamic...insisting we keep funding the department of the govenrnment you fear most.
Why do you want a gun free society with a "homeland" security force that is every bit as powerful as the mightiest military on the planet?
To what end do you want this supposed security?
What is your end game? Communism, Facism?
Oh brother.
Never said that. Anyone who wants a gun can still get a gun. I just want it to be more expensive driving the supply down ultimately.
Fewer gunshot victims in our emergency rooms at my hospitals is my goal.
Fewer
Sandy Hooks
Columbines
Virginia Techs
etc....
Would be nicer too.
Stringent enforcement of gun laws; promotion of gun crimes to Federal level where there is no parole and you're gone for the entire length of yoru sentence would be a big help. Federal Prosecutors have something like a 90+ % conviction rate. Aim that at armed robbers you end up with fewre armed robbers.
Why do you want a gun free society with a "homeland" security force that is every bit as powerful as the mightiest military on the planet?
To what end do you want this supposed security?
What is your end game? Communism, Facism?
Oh brother.
Never said that. Anyone who wants a gun can still get a gun. I just want it to be more expensive driving the supply down ultimately.
Fewer gunshot victims in our emergency rooms at my hospitals is my goal.
Fewer
Sandy Hooks
Columbines
Virginia Techs
etc....
Would be nicer too.
Stringent enforcement of gun laws; promotion of gun crimes to Federal level where there is no parole and you're gone for the entire length of yoru sentence would be a big help. Federal Prosecutors have something like a 90+ % conviction rate. Aim that at armed robbers you end up with fewre armed robbers.
Why are you so focused on mass shootings? 88 Americans were killed in mass shootings in the US last year. 530 people lost their lives one or 2 at a time in only Chicago during that time and about 16,000 nation wide.
180:1 odds that you will be shot as sole victim.
ROFL typical authoritarian thinks they can force demand to decrease by screwing people over. ROFL
I have tons of guns. Make it illegal I'd love to make some good money off my inventory.
What we need to do is put people like you, who take our liberties away, in jail.
It worked with cigarettes. It will work with guns.
Your liberties are safe. Nothing in the Constitution sets the price of the gun you're able to purchase. Remington does that.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
I'm not asking you to give up your source but really; the black market sounds great. You can avoid sales taxes so it makes me wonder why Dick's is sold out of weapons....everyone should be at this black market...right?
If illegal arms are so prevealant; why are gun manufacturers running 3 shifts and "can't keep up"?
Retard. It's legal to manufacture and buy guns. The question was what if guns were made illegal to manufacture and sell in the states. Then most of us would gladly tell the feds to shove it just as we did during prohibition and just as we are doing now regarding weed.
Of course you're putting words in my mouth.
Never once have I said I want to prohibit guns.
Debate all you wish but stop lying about my position.
The point was that if you drive up the price of guns, THEN they will be cheaper on the black market. Criminals won't have a problem getting them. The whole point of this is that your policies make it harder and harder for people to defend themselves without keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Seriously, after all this discussion, you don't get that?
You're assuming supply will remain the same as it is today. It won't. The price lowers demand and thus lowers supply
In fact, you'll likely see the price escalation keep guns out of the hands of the criminals and the youth.
Why?
If something costs 1 week's pay, it's pretty easy to get it.
If something costs 3 week's pay, it's harder to get; agreed?
So the unemployed (a lot of criminals don't have a day job; nor do kids like Kleibold, Harris, and that A-Hole who shot up Sandy Hook, Va Tech, Gabby Giffords etc (I can't list all of the recent perps and their financial conditions but suffice to say that many are not hob nobbing with Bill Gates) won't be able to afford the weaponry they seek.
It will take quite a while but we really need to do something.
And someone like me will start producing guns at a cost of 1.5 weeks pay and supply all the guns the private sector wants. Think Prohibition.
It worked with cigarettes. It will work with guns.
Your liberties are safe. Nothing in the Constitution sets the price of the gun you're able to purchase. Remington does that.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Hold on. A right is not an obligation on anyone. A right is something government cannot take away.
Remington is under no obligation to provide me with a rifle. The government cannot keep me from buying a rifle.
Do you see the difference?
It worked with cigarettes. It will work with guns.
Your liberties are safe. Nothing in the Constitution sets the price of the gun you're able to purchase. Remington does that.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Yes. Guns in the hands of criminals are problematic. How do you propose to solve that without violating my rights; without infringing my right to keep and bear arms?Oh brother.
Never said that. Anyone who wants a gun can still get a gun. I just want it to be more expensive driving the supply down ultimately.
Fewer gunshot victims in our emergency rooms at my hospitals is my goal.
Fewer
Sandy Hooks
Columbines
Virginia Techs
etc....
Would be nicer too.
Stringent enforcement of gun laws; promotion of gun crimes to Federal level where there is no parole and you're gone for the entire length of yoru sentence would be a big help. Federal Prosecutors have something like a 90+ % conviction rate. Aim that at armed robbers you end up with fewre armed robbers.
Why are you so focused on mass shootings? 88 Americans were killed in mass shootings in the US last year. 530 people lost their lives one or 2 at a time in only Chicago during that time and about 16,000 nation wide.
180:1 odds that you will be shot as sole victim.
You're right; mass shootings get the headlines but we have a chronic gun problem.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Typical libtard. Thinks a right to health care and guns means the government has to steal money from rich people to give them health care and guns for free.
Typical.
Oh, I get it. That's why modern progressive libtard liberals are not welcome here.No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Typical libtard. Thinks a right to health care and guns means the government has to steal money from rich people to give them health care and guns for free.
Typical.
Well if you have a right and government doesn't fund it, then government is preventing you from exercising your rights. You have the right, but you can't do it. So they HAVE to fund it. Get it?
It worked with cigarettes. It will work with guns.
Your liberties are safe. Nothing in the Constitution sets the price of the gun you're able to purchase. Remington does that.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Nothing I suggested places the governemnt between you and Remington. Get a fucking clue.What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
It's fucking frustrating trying to use logic with Liberals.
Remington is NOT the government, you fool. They have no obligation to provide me with free guns. The Constitution places limits on the powers of government, not corporations.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Typical libtard. Thinks a right to health care and guns means the government has to steal money from rich people to give them health care and guns for free.
Typical.
What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so fucking hard to understand?
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Hold on. A right is not an obligation on anyone. A right is something government cannot take away.
Remington is under no obligation to provide me with a rifle. The government cannot keep me from buying a rifle.
Do you see the difference?
Yes. Guns in the hands of criminals are problematic. How do you propose to solve that without violating my rights; without infringing my right to keep and bear arms?Why are you so focused on mass shootings? 88 Americans were killed in mass shootings in the US last year. 530 people lost their lives one or 2 at a time in only Chicago during that time and about 16,000 nation wide.
180:1 odds that you will be shot as sole victim.
You're right; mass shootings get the headlines but we have a chronic gun problem.
I could tell you how to cut US gun deaths in half within one year, but you wouldn't like my solution.
No need for cussing.
Ask Remington; they're the one charging you for your guns. They're infringing.
Hold on. A right is not an obligation on anyone. A right is something government cannot take away.
Remington is under no obligation to provide me with a rifle. The government cannot keep me from buying a rifle.
Do you see the difference?
Didn't ever suggest the government take anything away.
The government isn't keeping you from buying a rifle. I guess you mean sales taxes are unconstitutional...do explain.
No criminal record.
Honorably discharged Army Veteran
Hold down a good paying job.
Yeah, I probably could.
But there's the thing. The three guys mentioned had all been flagged as mentally ill.
Holmes was being thrown out of the university.
Loughner had been banned from a community college. and seriously, how much of a screwup do you have to be to get banned from a community college.
Cho was being privately tutored by the university because so many of the other students had complained about his creepy behavior.
IN short, an investigation WOULD have raised red flags.
The standard is, "These guy shouldn't have had a gun." Period. There is no calculus where these guys having a gun was ever a good idea.
If the only way to keep THESE guys from having guns is to take EVERYONE'S guns, I have no problem with that.
If you have way to keep the guns out of these guys hands, I'd be happy to hear it.
And there you have it, folks.
Like I said in my very first post in this thread, dimocrap scum want confiscation.
They'll surround it with lots of flowery language and pretend to be 'concerned' like they always do......
But it's a charade, it's Kabuki theatre --
dimocraps lie. It's what they do. They are the enemy of Freedom and American Values
They want confiscation. Anybody who believes otherwise is delusional
Every other industrialized country either LIMITS or BANS private gun ownership.
And they are just as free as we are, and generally have better values.
The problem with you guys is you don't want to solve the problem at all. You are fine with 32,000 gun death and 79,000 gun injuries every year, because, doooy, "Freedom" or something.
[
Umm, as they're are more limitations on firearms than here, they are, by definition, not as free as we are. For argument to be considred reasonably it should be able to be applied in other contexts. The bolded statement could and should just as easily read 'if everyone not having cars is what it takes to keep people from driving drun, I'm just fine with that.'
