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

[Bern80]

[
Again your soluition is completely illogical and inconsistant. Especially number 3. In no other circumstance do we do that. In our community just this past week a drunk drive killed four. Himself and the people in the car he hit. You are suggesting the manufacturer of the car he was driving bares some responsibility in that? You really are out to lunch.

And no, those countries didn't 'figure anything out'. They were stupid like you are. They tried to keep people who break laws from breaking the law by creating more laws.

If the car companies acted like the gun companies, you'd probably have a pretty good case againt them.

If you want to be equivlent, the Car companies would have to specifically market to drunks, fight to keep the definition of DUI so high you'd have to be drinking anti-freeze to qualify, and fight against sentences for drunk drivers.

Case in point. Today they suggested a minimum 3-year sentence in Illinois for anyone who commits a crime with a gun.

You know who is oppossing it? The NRA.

The only way that flies is if the truth is gun manufacturer's are marketing to people they know are likely to commit crimes with them. You haven't been able to show that. Again, the one time you attempted to do so was a lie. The two are equivlalent already making you hypocrite. You won't hold car manufacturers to the same standard you hold gun manufacturers.

 

[martybegan]

[
Again your soluition is completely illogical and inconsistant. Especially number 3. In no other circumstance do we do that. In our community just this past week a drunk drive killed four. Himself and the people in the car he hit. You are suggesting the manufacturer of the car he was driving bares some responsibility in that? You really are out to lunch.

And no, those countries didn't 'figure anything out'. They were stupid like you are. They tried to keep people who break laws from breaking the law by creating more laws.

If the car companies acted like the gun companies, you'd probably have a pretty good case againt them.

If you want to be equivlent, the Car companies would have to specifically market to drunks, fight to keep the definition of DUI so high you'd have to be drinking anti-freeze to qualify, and fight against sentences for drunk drivers.

Case in point. Today they suggested a minimum 3-year sentence in Illinois for anyone who commits a crime with a gun.

You know who is oppossing it? The NRA.

Care to provide a link for that? Is that the only part of the law, or is it part of an overall gun control law?

And would that mean someone who improperly stores thier gun is thus committing a crime, is thus a felon, and is thus banned from owning a gun ever again? Or is it a seperate crime that is comitted while having a gun?

 

[Geaux4it]

How ironic on a day when Obama Unconstitutionally stole the power of the House, I elected to add to my firearm collection with a S&W 686 Plus

One can never have to many, because we may need mine someday

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

So Joe is still going on even after I trashed his hard on for the Kellermann study? Wow, talk about a glutton for punishment.

You mean when you proved you really didn't understand what the Kellerman Study was about.

I've explained it to you several time, BiPolar boy. I'm not sure what else I can do for you.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The only way that flies is if the truth is gun manufacturer's are marketing to people they know are likely to commit crimes with them. You haven't been able to show that. Again, the one time you attempted to do so was a lie. The two are equivlalent already making you hypocrite. You won't hold car manufacturers to the same standard you hold gun manufacturers.

Besides their oppossition to any kind of background check and oppossition to minimum sentences for people who commit crimes with guns?

Gun makers, help keep weapons out of criminals' hands - CNN.com

What the Gun Industry and the NRA Don?t Want You To Know

 

[Bern80]

[
Again your soluition is completely illogical and inconsistant. Especially number 3. In no other circumstance do we do that. In our community just this past week a drunk drive killed four. Himself and the people in the car he hit. You are suggesting the manufacturer of the car he was driving bares some responsibility in that? You really are out to lunch.

And no, those countries didn't 'figure anything out'. They were stupid like you are. They tried to keep people who break laws from breaking the law by creating more laws.

If the car companies acted like the gun companies, you'd probably have a pretty good case againt them.

If you want to be equivlent, the Car companies would have to specifically market to drunks, fight to keep the definition of DUI so high you'd have to be drinking anti-freeze to qualify, and fight against sentences for drunk drivers.

Case in point. Today they suggested a minimum 3-year sentence in Illinois for anyone who commits a crime with a gun.

You know who is oppossing it? The NRA.

Care to provide a link for that? Is that the only part of the law, or is it part of an overall gun control law?

And would that mean someone who improperly stores thier gun is thus committing a crime, is thus a felon, and is thus banned from owning a gun ever again? Or is it a seperate crime that is comitted while having a gun?

I wouldn't ask him about potential laws. He doensn't really care about the law. The only law he's interested in is the one that bans all guns outright. Discussing any measure short of that with him is pointless. He's trying to argue that because must people know the truth when they hear it, regardless of whether they admit it. And he knows the truth of his position faulty logistically and pragmatically.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I wouldn't ask him about potential laws. He doensn't really care about the law. The only law he's interested in is the one that bans all guns outright. Discussing any measure short of that with him is pointless. He's trying to argue that because must people know the truth when they hear it, regardless of whether they admit it. And he knows the truth of his position faulty logistically and pragmatically.

Pragmatically, every other industrialized democracy either LIMITS or BANS private gun ownership.

They are just as free as we aer, they have less crime, and they get by just fine.

What they don't have are gun manufacturers who keep pouring gasoline on the fire because they are selling the gasoliine.

 

[Bern80]

[

The only way that flies is if the truth is gun manufacturer's are marketing to people they know are likely to commit crimes with them. You haven't been able to show that. Again, the one time you attempted to do so was a lie. The two are equivlalent already making you hypocrite. You won't hold car manufacturers to the same standard you hold gun manufacturers.

Besides their oppossition to any kind of background check and oppossition to minimum sentences for people who commit crimes with guns?

Gun makers, help keep weapons out of criminals' hands - CNN.com

What the Gun Industry and the NRA Don?t Want You To Know

Much like you, your sources provide no evidence. His analogies are as bad as yours too seeing as how they don't hold. He equates malfunctioning tires to gun related violence, but the issue is not about malfunctioning guns.

He's concerned about information about gun violence. Why? You think if either of you can come up with a big enough number that somehow proves guns are too dangerous for people to have? That doesn't change the fact that argument is inconsistent. You can't claim you're concerned about the number of deaths an inanimate object is involved and give some of them a pass essentially saying the number of deaths are okay for one object, but not another.

 

[Bern80]

[

I wouldn't ask him about potential laws. He doensn't really care about the law. The only law he's interested in is the one that bans all guns outright. Discussing any measure short of that with him is pointless. He's trying to argue that because must people know the truth when they hear it, regardless of whether they admit it. And he knows the truth of his position faulty logistically and pragmatically.

Pragmatically, every other industrialized democracy either LIMITS or BANS private gun ownership.

They are just as free as we aer, they have less crime, and they get by just fine.

What they don't have are gun manufacturers who keep pouring gasoline on the fire because they are selling the gasoliine.

We don't either. That is all in your delusioned head. And since those other countries are deprived of a choice that we have they are by definition less free. You keep spouting about other countries banning guns. The mere fact that they undertake some policy does not in of itself make it good or moral policy. The fact that 'other countries do it' is a truly meaningless argument.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

[

I wouldn't ask him about potential laws. He doensn't really care about the law. The only law he's interested in is the one that bans all guns outright. Discussing any measure short of that with him is pointless. He's trying to argue that because must people know the truth when they hear it, regardless of whether they admit it. And he knows the truth of his position faulty logistically and pragmatically.

Pragmatically, every other industrialized democracy either LIMITS or BANS private gun ownership.

They are just as free as we aer, they have less crime, and they get by just fine.

What they don't have are gun manufacturers who keep pouring gasoline on the fire because they are selling the gasoliine.

Actually you are lying the Countries you keep citing for the most part do NOT have less violence, just less violence with firearms. Britain and Japan I believe have more violence and Japan has more suicides. Not sure on Germany but they have a violence problem as well as does France.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Doesn't list per capita but one can easily see that we are not the leader based on population compared to violent crimes.

Total crimes statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime

List of countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By population and crime stats.

Germany has about 1/4th our population and has more then half as many violent crimes per year.

France has about 1/5th our population and has 1/3rd the number of violent crimes per year.

Britain has about 1/5th our population and has over half as many violent crimes as we do per year.

Canada has 1/9th as many people as us and has a little more then 1/4th as many violent crimes a year.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Did the math to one point.

USA Violante percentage of population..... .03 percent.

Germany Violence percentage of population.... .05 percent.

France Violence percentage of population...... .05 percent.

Britain Violence percentage per population..... .1 percent

Canada Violence per population......... .07 percent.

Now remind me how we are more violent then these Countries?

 

[JoeB131]

[

I wouldn't ask him about potential laws. He doensn't really care about the law. The only law he's interested in is the one that bans all guns outright. Discussing any measure short of that with him is pointless. He's trying to argue that because must people know the truth when they hear it, regardless of whether they admit it. And he knows the truth of his position faulty logistically and pragmatically.

Pragmatically, every other industrialized democracy either LIMITS or BANS private gun ownership.

They are just as free as we aer, they have less crime, and they get by just fine.

What they don't have are gun manufacturers who keep pouring gasoline on the fire because they are selling the gasoliine.

We don't either. That is all in your delusioned head. And since those other countries are deprived of a choice that we have they are by definition less free. You keep spouting about other countries banning guns. The mere fact that they undertake some policy does not in of itself make it good or moral policy. The fact that 'other countries do it' is a truly meaningless argument.

Actually, we do.

It makes excellent moral policy. They've made a calculation that the benefits of arming citizens (there really aren't any) is outweighed by the lives saved in reductions in crime, murder, suicides and accidents.

And trust me, the minute we start holding the gun companies financially liable, will be the minute they won't be so keen on selling guns to the Nancy Lanzas of the world.

 

[JoeB131]

Doesn't list per capita but one can easily see that we are not the leader based on population compared to violent crimes.

Total crimes statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime

List of countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By population and crime stats.

Germany has about 1/4th our population and has more then half as many violent crimes per year.

France has about 1/5th our population and has 1/3rd the number of violent crimes per year.

Britain has about 1/5th our population and has over half as many violent crimes as we do per year.

Canada has 1/9th as many people as us and has a little more then 1/4th as many violent crimes a year.

These are horseshit figures.

The US figures only include about four crimes, while those other countries count ALL violent crimes.

 

[martybegan]

Doesn't list per capita but one can easily see that we are not the leader based on population compared to violent crimes.

Total crimes statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime

List of countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By population and crime stats.

Germany has about 1/4th our population and has more then half as many violent crimes per year.

France has about 1/5th our population and has 1/3rd the number of violent crimes per year.

Britain has about 1/5th our population and has over half as many violent crimes as we do per year.

Canada has 1/9th as many people as us and has a little more then 1/4th as many violent crimes a year.

These are horseshit figures.

The US figures only include about four crimes, while those other countries count ALL violent crimes.

and some other countries only count murders when a CONVICTION occurs, we count them from police records. I have a feeling the other crimes also only count on CONVICTION.

 

[JoeB131]

[

and some other countries only count murders when a CONVICTION occurs, we count them from police records. I have a feeling the other crimes also only count on CONVICTION.

So, um, yeah.

The UK only had 48 gun murders, and we had 11,101.

So either British Prosecutors are like something out of a Monty Python Sketch....

Or we really, really have a lot of people being killed with guns...

I'm going with the latter.

 

[Geaux4it]

IMO- Everyone should be buying more guns and hording ammunition.

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

[

and some other countries only count murders when a CONVICTION occurs, we count them from police records. I have a feeling the other crimes also only count on CONVICTION.

So, um, yeah.

The UK only had 48 gun murders, and we had 11,101.

So either British Prosecutors are like something out of a Monty Python Sketch....

Or we really, really have a lot of people being killed with guns...

I'm going with the latter.

Daily Telegraph Poll: 86% Want To Repeal UK Handgun Ban | Weasel Zippers

An overwhelming majority of British citizens want their country’s handgun ban repealed, according to the results of an on-line poll conducted by the Daily Telegraph, described Wednesday as the United Kingdom’s “most widely read broadsheet newspaper” by the Commentator.

As this column was updated Thursday, more than 14,900 votes had been cast in the unscientific poll, and of those, 12,603 support a repeal of the 1997 gun ban, an 84.35 percent vote. It far out-distanced votes for several other measures that Britons would like to see introduced in the House of Commons, according to the newspaper.

 

[JoeB131]

By their own admission...

unscientific poll

Nuff said.

 

[martybegan]

[

and some other countries only count murders when a CONVICTION occurs, we count them from police records. I have a feeling the other crimes also only count on CONVICTION.

So, um, yeah.

The UK only had 48 gun murders, and we had 11,101.

So either British Prosecutors are like something out of a Monty Python Sketch....

Or we really, really have a lot of people being killed with guns...

I'm going with the latter.

How many total murders vs. total murders JoeBlow? And if they underreported due to only counting convictions, (which may occur years later) how much closer would the overall numbers be?

A person dead is a person dead, your fear and loathing of guns nonwithstanding.

Typical JoeDouche delfection when he's caught making crap up. Same old dipshit Joe.