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

I gave you three uses of guns that DWARF using guns to kill people, which you said is the #1 use of guns.

Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

First of all, you can't count to three, did you get tired after two?

And second, you have no logical ability as hunting being "sadistic" doesn't support that shooting people is the #1 use of guns. BTW, you're full of it. You and Candy live across the hall from each other in Berkley where you look down on us non-coastal barbarians, don't you? BTW, the #1 thing hunters learn to do is NOT shoot people. That is paramount over actually shooting game.

And third, I pointed out that for defense, people go to the firing range where people aren't trying to kill anyone. And you only addressed shooting at intruders, though your platitude was interesting. OK, it wasn't, I was just trying to give you something.

You didn't do well in school, did you Joe?
 
[

Well, you do mention your opposition to either Jews defending themselves or stopping anyone who murders them. If Jews die and don't defend themselves, do the math on the ultimate result.

But what about you stop deflecting and address the point? I gave you three uses of guns that DWARF using guns to kill people, which you said is the #1 use of guns.

Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

How is hunting sadistic? Not that it's relevant because the argument that is down the drain is that anyone needs a reason that YOU find valid to own a gun.

Joe likes other people to kill his food for him because that's civilized.
 
Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

How is hunting sadistic? Not that it's relevant because the argument that is down the drain is that anyone needs a reason that YOU find valid to own a gun.

Joe likes other people to kill his food for him because that's civilized.

Now the way they prepare the meat for fast food joints, that I might consider sadistic. Though like you said, I'm sure joe never even considered that scarfing down a whopper.
 
Last edited:
[

Well, you do mention your opposition to either Jews defending themselves or stopping anyone who murders them. If Jews die and don't defend themselves, do the math on the ultimate result.

But what about you stop deflecting and address the point? I gave you three uses of guns that DWARF using guns to kill people, which you said is the #1 use of guns.

Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

How is hunting sadistic? Not that it's relevant because the argument that is down the drain is that anyone needs a reason that YOU find valid to own a gun.


Stalking and murdering an animal you may have no intention of eating? Yeah. Sadistic.

Sorry. You don't need a gun. You might WANT a gun, but no one needs to starve because they can't go out and shoot an animal.
 
I gave you three uses of guns that DWARF using guns to kill people, which you said is the #1 use of guns.

Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

First of all, you can't count to three, did you get tired after two?

And second, you have no logical ability as hunting being "sadistic" doesn't support that shooting people is the #1 use of guns. BTW, you're full of it. You and Candy live across the hall from each other in Berkley where you look down on us non-coastal barbarians, don't you? BTW, the #1 thing hunters learn to do is NOT shoot people. That is paramount over actually shooting game.

And third, I pointed out that for defense, people go to the firing range where people aren't trying to kill anyone. And you only addressed shooting at intruders, though your platitude was interesting. OK, it wasn't, I was just trying to give you something.

You didn't do well in school, did you Joe?

Nah, I just thought the target shooting was even more retarded than the other two, so I was trying not to embarrass you.

Guns weren't invented to shoot targets. They were invented to kill people. You know what most targets at target ranges look like? PEOPLE!!!!

mituugjZuq6UZtUxI1EsUTw.jpg


You and Candy live across the hall from each other in Berkley where you look down on us non-coastal barbarians, don't you?

Yes. I really, really do look down on you non-coastal red state, inbred, bible thumping, gun toting morons who let the wealthy dismantled the country and ship it to fucking China.

If there was only a way to keep you from breeding in the interest of evolution
 
[

Well, you do mention your opposition to either Jews defending themselves or stopping anyone who murders them. If Jews die and don't defend themselves, do the math on the ultimate result.

But what about you stop deflecting and address the point? I gave you three uses of guns that DWARF using guns to kill people, which you said is the #1 use of guns.

Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

Actually I believe the last estimate was that 2 million times a year someone either uses or shows a weapon to stop a crime. Most times just showing it prevents the act.

That estimate came from the NRA, and like anything else the National Rampage Association says, it's bullshit.

The real number is 200. That's how many justifiable homicides were recorded by the FBI by civilians against criminals.

It almost never fucking happens.
 
Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

How is hunting sadistic? Not that it's relevant because the argument that is down the drain is that anyone needs a reason that YOU find valid to own a gun.


Stalking and murdering an animal you may have no intention of eating? Yeah. Sadistic.

Sorry. You don't need a gun. You might WANT a gun, but no one needs to starve because they can't go out and shoot an animal.

You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat. By your rationale of 'hunting', sharks, lions, wolves, really any meat eater, is sadistic. I assume you're claiming to be a vegan seeing as how the things they do to the animals raised for meat for fast food joints is about as sadistic as it gets. That''s another reason I hunt. It's more humane than how you're avg. burger joint gets their meat. I know exactly where it's coming from and how it was processed. If one is going to consume meat, I find hunting to be far healthier and more human alternative than buying it.

Again your 'need' argument is not a legitmate argument. The statistics relative to other objects don't support your position. Given just the number of guns out there and people who posses them the chances that any one person will hurt someone with one are closer to zero than even one percent. Statistically you're more likely to acccidentally kill someone with your care than you are to intentionally kill someone with a gun. Again why your need argument is rather selfish since you're saying the deaths associated with car ownership are acceptable because people 'need' (which isn't true either) them. Sorry, you may not WANT me to have a gun, but you have no logical rationale to keep me from having one.
 
Last edited:
Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

Actually I believe the last estimate was that 2 million times a year someone either uses or shows a weapon to stop a crime. Most times just showing it prevents the act.

That estimate came from the NRA, and like anything else the National Rampage Association says, it's bullshit.

The real number is 200. That's how many justifiable homicides were recorded by the FBI by civilians against criminals.

It almost never fucking happens.

He is talking about how many times a gun prevented a crime from being perpetrated. A gun doesn't need to be fired to do that. If a perp. simply recognizes the danger to their own life simply by recognizing they could be shot, they are less likely to commit the crime. So if the number who died by justifiable homicide is 200, the number of crimes prevented because the potential victim had a gun is obvisouly much higher than that.
 
Last edited:
Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

Actually I believe the last estimate was that 2 million times a year someone either uses or shows a weapon to stop a crime. Most times just showing it prevents the act.

That estimate came from the NRA, and like anything else the National Rampage Association says, it's bullshit.

The real number is 200. That's how many justifiable homicides were recorded by the FBI by civilians against criminals.

It almost never fucking happens.

Not every encounter where a good guy pulls a gun ends in a dead bad guy. Some end in just a wounding, some the bad guy is held until the police show up, some the bad guy runs.
 
Sorry. You don't need a gun. You might WANT a gun, but no one needs to starve because they can't go out and shoot an animal.

You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat

And you are a typical hunter. Joe is a typical liberal. He eats animals that were confined for their lives in small areas and murdered by someone else for him when their flesh was optimal for mass market consumption. Then he looks down his nose at the heathens who "hunt" and kill their own food because that's unsavory. He probably ate at McDonald's for lunch...
 
Stalking and murdering an animal you may have no intention of eating? Yeah. Sadistic.

Sorry. You don't need a gun. You might WANT a gun, but no one needs to starve because they can't go out and shoot an animal.

In 2010, 407,796 pounds of meat (1.6 million servings) were provided for the hungry by Virginia hunters. Hunters For The Hungry Now, that's food you didn't have to provide through food stamps or other tax payer programs. Not to mention it keeps a lot of deer from going through windshields (a real problem in rural areas by the way).

When I was a teenager, I used to provide for this family up the road from us that was hungry. I knew the dad and he was too proud to get food stamps, so I gave him a lot of venison every year. You know, the whole "we had a good season, too much for the freezer, hate to see it go to waste" dance.

I know, I'm a barbarian.
 
[

You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat. By your rationale of 'hunting', sharks, lions, wolves, really any meat eater, is sadistic. I assume you're claiming to be a vegan seeing as how the things they do to the animals raised for meat for fast food joints is about as sadistic as it gets. That''s another reason I hunt. It's more humane than how you're avg. burger joint gets their meat. I know exactly where it's coming from and how it was processed. If one is going to consume meat, I find hunting to be far healthier and more human alternative than buying it.

Again your 'need' argument is not a legitmate argument. The statistics relative to other objects don't support your position. Given just the number of guns out there and people who posses them the chances that any one person will hurt someone with one are closer to zero than even one percent. Statistically you're more likely to acccidentally kill someone with your care than you are to intentionally kill someone with a gun. Again why your need argument is rather selfish since you're saying the deaths associated with car ownership are acceptable because people 'need' (which isn't true either) them. Sorry, you may not WANT me to have a gun, but you have no logical rationale to keep me from having one.

People really do need cars in this society, our entire civilization has been built around them for the last 60 years....

Guns, not so much. We could confiscate every gun in the country, and life really would go on, just fine.
 
Sorry. You don't need a gun. You might WANT a gun, but no one needs to starve because they can't go out and shoot an animal.

You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat

And you are a typical hunter. Joe is a typical liberal. He eats animals that were confined for their lives in small areas and murdered by someone else for him when their flesh was optimal for mass market consumption. Then he looks down his nose at the heathens who "hunt" and kill their own food because that's unsavory. He probably ate at McDonald's for lunch...

Actually, I ate at boston market for lunch, and had the assurance that my lunch was raised on a farm, kept free of disease, and humanely dispatched.
 
[

You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat. By your rationale of 'hunting', sharks, lions, wolves, really any meat eater, is sadistic. I assume you're claiming to be a vegan seeing as how the things they do to the animals raised for meat for fast food joints is about as sadistic as it gets. That''s another reason I hunt. It's more humane than how you're avg. burger joint gets their meat. I know exactly where it's coming from and how it was processed. If one is going to consume meat, I find hunting to be far healthier and more human alternative than buying it.

Again your 'need' argument is not a legitmate argument. The statistics relative to other objects don't support your position. Given just the number of guns out there and people who posses them the chances that any one person will hurt someone with one are closer to zero than even one percent. Statistically you're more likely to acccidentally kill someone with your care than you are to intentionally kill someone with a gun. Again why your need argument is rather selfish since you're saying the deaths associated with car ownership are acceptable because people 'need' (which isn't true either) them. Sorry, you may not WANT me to have a gun, but you have no logical rationale to keep me from having one.

People really do need cars in this society, our entire civilization has been built around them for the last 60 years....

Guns, not so much. We could confiscate every gun in the country, and life really would go on, just fine.

So get an amendment to do that, that is the only way you can even begin to try.
 
[

You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat. By your rationale of 'hunting', sharks, lions, wolves, really any meat eater, is sadistic. I assume you're claiming to be a vegan seeing as how the things they do to the animals raised for meat for fast food joints is about as sadistic as it gets. That''s another reason I hunt. It's more humane than how you're avg. burger joint gets their meat. I know exactly where it's coming from and how it was processed. If one is going to consume meat, I find hunting to be far healthier and more human alternative than buying it.

Again your 'need' argument is not a legitmate argument. The statistics relative to other objects don't support your position. Given just the number of guns out there and people who posses them the chances that any one person will hurt someone with one are closer to zero than even one percent. Statistically you're more likely to acccidentally kill someone with your care than you are to intentionally kill someone with a gun. Again why your need argument is rather selfish since you're saying the deaths associated with car ownership are acceptable because people 'need' (which isn't true either) them. Sorry, you may not WANT me to have a gun, but you have no logical rationale to keep me from having one.

People really do need cars in this society, our entire civilization has been built around them for the last 60 years....

Guns, not so much. We could confiscate every gun in the country, and life really would go on, just fine.

And we could all agree for the sake of the 35,000 people that die each year we make the sacrifice to not use automobiles. They are not a necessity. The reality is life would go on to without cars. The reality is you don't want them banned because it would inconvenience. The deaths they are involved in are okay to you because having to do without it would be too much of an inconvenience. Really? It's okay that 35,000 people a year die so you don't have to be inconvenienced?
 
You talk abou so much you clearly know so little about. A lot of hunting is waiting, not stalking and I don't shoot anything that I'm not going to eat

And you are a typical hunter. Joe is a typical liberal. He eats animals that were confined for their lives in small areas and murdered by someone else for him when their flesh was optimal for mass market consumption. Then he looks down his nose at the heathens who "hunt" and kill their own food because that's unsavory. He probably ate at McDonald's for lunch...

Actually, I ate at boston market for lunch, and had the assurance that my lunch was raised on a farm, kept free of disease, and humanely dispatched.

So what is humane about the way you get your meat and inhumane about the way i get meat? The animals I kill for meat are free their entire lives until I shoot them. The ones you eat are not.
 
Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

How is hunting sadistic? Not that it's relevant because the argument that is down the drain is that anyone needs a reason that YOU find valid to own a gun.


Stalking and murdering an animal you may have no intention of eating? Yeah. Sadistic.

Sorry. You don't need a gun. You might WANT a gun, but no one needs to starve because they can't go out and shoot an animal.

The last thing I shot that I didn't eat was a water moccasin. Hmm was that hunting or self defense?
 
Hey, guy, the Zionists have been defending themselves in Palestine for 60 years now.

I don't think that they are making much progress, as the Palestinians still want to kill their sorry asses.

But to the point, Hunting is a sadistic sport and defensive gun uses almost never happen... so those arguments are down the drain.

Actually I believe the last estimate was that 2 million times a year someone either uses or shows a weapon to stop a crime. Most times just showing it prevents the act.

That estimate came from the NRA, and like anything else the National Rampage Association says, it's bullshit.

The real number is 200. That's how many justifiable homicides were recorded by the FBI by civilians against criminals.

It almost never fucking happens.

So even at that, roughly 3 times as many that die in mass shootings. You want to write law based on that, don't you?

Come on now! A grossly understated, unsupported number is statistically irrelevant, but 70 or so people/year, dying in mass shootings warrants a ban on scary black guns and 10 round and bigger magazines.

Explain THAT, Joe!
 
Actually I believe the last estimate was that 2 million times a year someone either uses or shows a weapon to stop a crime. Most times just showing it prevents the act.

That estimate came from the NRA, and like anything else the National Rampage Association says, it's bullshit.

The real number is 200. That's how many justifiable homicides were recorded by the FBI by civilians against criminals.

It almost never fucking happens.

So even at that, roughly 3 times as many that die in mass shootings. You want to write law based on that, don't you?

Come on now! A grossly understated, unsupported number is statistically irrelevant, but 70 or so people/year, dying in mass shootings warrants a ban on scary black guns and 10 round and bigger magazines.

Explain THAT, Joe!

Asking Joe to explain his premises would be like trying to stop a black hole from sucking space. :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top