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.
As usual, you simply make shit up.
{n 1971, Article 10 of the present Constitution was reformed[11] to limit the right to keep arms within the home only (in Spanish: ...derecho a poseer armas en su domicilio...) and reserved the right to bear arms outside the home only to those explicitly authorized by law (i.e. police, military, armed security officers). The following year, the Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives came into force[12] and gave the federal government complete jurisdiction and control to the legal proliferation of firearms in the country; at the same time, heavily limiting and restricting the legal access to firearms by civilians.
As a result of the changes to Article 10 of the Mexican Constitution and the enactment of the Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives, openly carrying a firearm or carrying a concealed weapon in public is virtually forbidden to private citizens, unless explicitly authorized by the Secretariat of National Defense (SEDENA). For purposes of personal protection, firearms are only permitted within the place of residence and of the type and caliber permitted by law.}
Gun politics in Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So you just admitted.
GUN OWNERSHIP IS LEGAL IN MEXICO!!!!!
They just can't walk down the street like the Frito Bandito...
They have no right to bear arms, as you claimed, and even ownership is severely limited.
You again lied, and got caught. You simply make shit up.
They have a right to bear arms.
It's just that they actually interpret that as "A crazy person in a clown costume can't walk into a gun store and walk out with a small arsenal".
Whew. That actually makes sense. To everyone but the NRA, apparently.
They have a right to bear arms.
So, AFTER it is proven that you are lying, and just making shit up - you figure you can cover it by lying again?
It's just that they actually interpret that as "A crazy person in a clown costume can't walk into a gun store and walk out with a small arsenal".
Whew. That actually makes sense. To everyone but the NRA, apparently.
No fucktard, they are PROHIBITED from bearing arms unless they are part of the police or military.
Learn to read, moron.
And quit yer fucking lying - it makes you look crazy.
Because of our drug and gang banger culture. Next question...
No drugs or gangs in any other country in the world, except for the U.S.
Solid point.
This graph is deliberately designed to mislead. If you set the top range at 50 (instead of the microscopic "3") there would be no discernible difference between the US and other countries with regards to gun violence.
We're talking a 0.00003% (3/100,000) murder rate vs a 0.000005% (0.5/100,000) murder rate. Mathematically speaking, those two numbers are virtually the same.
11k gun homicides a year, w/ 9k are directly related to gang violence/poverty. I think we have a gang/violence poverty issue, not a gun one. Now, I'm not against throwing out ideas on limiting ways criminals obtain handguns, however when the president talks about banning so called "assault rifles" - a type of gun who's overall group (the rifle) is responsible for less than 300 deaths per year out of a population of 300 million - you can understand why I get a little skeptical about his intentions...
And speaking of instructive...........
Gallup Poll: Support for gun control is waning, opposition to handgun ban at all-time high
from October of 2013 by the way!!!
Gallup Poll: Support for gun control is waning, opposition to handgun ban at all-time high
By Larry Keane, National Shooting Sports Foundation
In their never-ending effort to restrict law-abiding Americans access to firearms, the anti-gun establishment will do just about anything. In recent weeks they have shown a willingness to use a tragedy to score political points and misrepresent their true aims to gain supporters.
One of the anti-gun lobbys leading arguments is that fewer guns equals less violence. This seems like a logical argument, and is often passed on as fact. But, as with most of the arguments the anti-gun left recycles over and over, the facts simply do not back it up.
In the fall issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons , Jane M. Orient, M.D. argues there is no evidence-based support for more gun control measures. Rather, the statistics gun-control proponents cite are cherry-picked from larger data sets that show no correlation between more gun laws and less violence.
And unlike those trying to curb the Second Amendment, Dr. Orient has the facts squarely on her side. Since 1993, homicides with firearms and other crimes with firearms are down significantly (39 and 69 percent, respectively). Using the gun-control line of thinking, one would expect there to be significantly fewer firearms now than in 1993. Nothing could be further from the truth. That period of decreased violence actually corresponds with a substantial increase in the number of guns owned by Americans.
Read more: Debunked: Major anti-gun talking point rendered useless | The Daily Caller
it was a good guy with a gun
who stopped a bad guy with a gun
in the latest school shooting
stopping the incident in less then 80 seconds after it started
more guns =less mayhem and death
it was a good guy with a gun
who stopped a bad guy with a gun
in the latest school shooting
stopping the incident in less then 80 seconds after it started
more guns =less mayhem and death
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
it was a good guy with a gun
who stopped a bad guy with a gun
in the latest school shooting
stopping the incident in less then 80 seconds after it started
more guns =less mayhem and death
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
it was a good guy with a gun
who stopped a bad guy with a gun
in the latest school shooting
stopping the incident in less then 80 seconds after it started
more guns =less mayhem and death
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
fringe opinions are gay
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
fringe opinions are gay
at least joe has the ballz to post his non sense
it was a good guy with a gun
who stopped a bad guy with a gun
in the latest school shooting
stopping the incident in less then 80 seconds after it started
more guns =less mayhem and death
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
yes a trained good guy with a gun
stopped a bad guy with a gun
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
yes a trained good guy with a gun
stopped a bad guy with a gun
A trained good guy with a gun who was trained and paid specifically to protect that school STILL failed to protect the two students who were shot (one is still in a coma) or to keep the gunman from killing himself.
Now, my solution. The kid can't buy a gun. Or at least he can't buy a gun without a thorough background check and a long waiting period. Then there's no gun in that equation to start with.
yes a trained good guy with a gun
stopped a bad guy with a gun
A trained good guy with a gun who was trained and paid specifically to protect that school STILL failed to protect the two students who were shot (one is still in a coma) or to keep the gunman from killing himself.
Now, my solution. The kid can't buy a gun. Or at least he can't buy a gun without a thorough background check and a long waiting period. Then there's no gun in that equation to start with.
Your solution is a non-starter because it is a communist, anti-American idea. Swim downstream much?
-Geaux
No, a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL limited what a confused kid could do.
A confused kid who was able to walk into a store, buy a gun, and go off to hunt the teacher who cut him from the debate team.
The problem with that equation ist he first variable (he was able to get a gun) not the last variable (A trained professional security person with a gun was able to stop him.)
yes a trained good guy with a gun
stopped a bad guy with a gun
A trained good guy with a gun who was trained and paid specifically to protect that school STILL failed to protect the two students who were shot (one is still in a coma) or to keep the gunman from killing himself.
Now, my solution. The kid can't buy a gun. Or at least he can't buy a gun without a thorough background check and a long waiting period. Then there's no gun in that equation to start with.
yes a trained good guy with a gun
stopped a bad guy with a gun
A trained good guy with a gun who was trained and paid specifically to protect that school STILL failed to protect the two students who were shot (one is still in a coma) or to keep the gunman from killing himself.
Now, my solution. The kid can't buy a gun. Or at least he can't buy a gun without a thorough background check and a long waiting period. Then there's no gun in that equation to start with.
the incident was stopped in less the 80 seconds
unlike when there is no protection
where an incident lasts 15 minutes or so
or until good guys with guns show up to the scene
A trained good guy with a gun who was trained and paid specifically to protect that school STILL failed to protect the two students who were shot (one is still in a coma) or to keep the gunman from killing himself.
Now, my solution. The kid can't buy a gun. Or at least he can't buy a gun without a thorough background check and a long waiting period. Then there's no gun in that equation to start with.
the incident was stopped in less the 80 seconds
unlike when there is no protection
where an incident lasts 15 minutes or so
or until good guys with guns show up to the scene
Okay, but 80 seconds was long enough to still result in three people being killed or injured.
Not having a gun in play to start with- Incident is stopped before it happens.
This is the problem when people think of gun ownership as a "right" and you have a gun industry that is bound and determined to scare us all shitless into buying their product by proliferating it into as many unstable hands as they can.
I am perfectly willing to concede SOME private gun ownership if the NRA and Gun industry are willing to accept SOME responsibility in limiting who can have a gun. But frankly, that's not hteir business model. There's no profit in responsible gun ownership. When you are selling fear, you need fear.
