No one is going to take your guns

[JoeB131]

[

When the Police are the only ones with firearms ... You by definition have a Police State ... That is not paranoia. It is no harder to say 150 times than it is to say 160 times ... And I don't care who agrees with the incorrect answer.

Try again peanut ...

.

Ignoring your idiotic trying to parse the math question, (Pssst... Pssst- if you throw in the 1000 accidental gun deaths, it is 160 to one.) I actually am going to play with the 'We are in a police state" nonsense.

The other G-7 Countries either limit or ban guns. So are they police states? Let's look at these figures from wiki- Police officers per 100,000 people

List of countries by number of police officers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US 256
UK - 307
Canada - 202
France - 356
Italy - 417
Germany - 298
Japan 197

So , no, some of them have less cops, some have more, but we all have about the same amount, less than half a percent of our population engaged in being police. So much for a "police State".

Hey, but here's a better measure. How many of our people do we lock up per 100 K people.

List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US - 716
UK - 148
Canada - 114
France - 101
Italy - 108
Germany 80
Japan - 54

Soooo- We have about as many people as police officers, we have a shitload more murders and we lock up 5 to 14 as many of our citizens per capita.

But, yeah, guns are all about "Freedom", man.

 

[daveman]

Turns out they lied.

Sherrie Questioning All: The gun grabbers always say "Registration does not lead to Confiscation." Hmm... Seems New York is proving that WRONG - Confiscating weapons, registered in state. Letter proving it

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

I can tell you haven't given this any thought.

None, because some of the guns that USED to be legal are now illegal, thanks to the ridiculous law the irrational gun-haters in NYC passed.

Predictably, you have no problem with this.

 

[daveman]

And yet another!

"the Bushmaster"
(to The Pusher)

You know I've sold a lot of Glocks
O' lord, I've pushed a lot of 9 mils
But I've never touched nothin
That that my spirit could kill
You know, I've seen a lot of people
Layin' round
With tombstones in their eyes
But the Bushmaster don't care
If you live or if you die

God damn, The Bushmaster
God damn, I say The Bushmaster
I said God damn, God damn The
Bushmaster man

You know the dealer, the Dealer is a man
With self-defense in his hand
Oh but the Bushmaster is a monster
he'll send all to the promised land
The dealer for a nickel
Lord, will sell you lots of sweet dreams
Ah, but the Bushmaster stacks the bodies
Lord, he'll leave your, he'll leave your mind to scream

God damn, The Bushmaster
God damn, God damn the Bushmaster
I said God damn, God, God damn The Bushmaster man

Well, now if I were the president of this land
You know, I'd declare total war on The Bushmaster man
I'd cut him if he stands, and I'd shoot him if he'd run
Yes I'd kill him with my Bible and my razor and my gun

God damn The Bushmaster
Gad damn The Bushmaster
I said God damn, God damn The Bushmaster man

Don't quit your day job -- if you have one.

And after I complemented your avatar?

Dissapointed

Oh, well.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Turns out they lied.

Sherrie Questioning All: The gun grabbers always say "Registration does not lead to Confiscation." Hmm... Seems New York is proving that WRONG - Confiscating weapons, registered in state. Letter proving it

The ONLY rational response is, "come take them, motherfuckers."

 

[Uncensored2008]

Drama Queen alert.


"shot and/or killed in New York for taking firearms from law abiding citizens"?

Uh - you're saying law abiding citizens would murder? That actually would make taking their guns away the right thing to do, doncha think?

If I got one of those letters, I would kill any LEO who attempted to enforce it. I would hope EVERY person here would.

Sorry, you don't get to start that shit here, no gun confiscations, no death camps, no yellow arm bands.

You want civil war, for real? This is it.

 

[martybegan]

[

When the Police are the only ones with firearms ... You by definition have a Police State ... That is not paranoia. It is no harder to say 150 times than it is to say 160 times ... And I don't care who agrees with the incorrect answer.

Try again peanut ...

.

Ignoring your idiotic trying to parse the math question, (Pssst... Pssst- if you throw in the 1000 accidental gun deaths, it is 160 to one.) I actually am going to play with the 'We are in a police state" nonsense.

The other G-7 Countries either limit or ban guns. So are they police states? Let's look at these figures from wiki- Police officers per 100,000 people

List of countries by number of police officers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US 256
UK - 307
Canada - 202
France - 356
Italy - 417
Germany - 298
Japan 197

So , no, some of them have less cops, some have more, but we all have about the same amount, less than half a percent of our population engaged in being police. So much for a "police State".

Hey, but here's a better measure. How many of our people do we lock up per 100 K people.

List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US - 716
UK - 148
Canada - 114
France - 101
Italy - 108
Germany 80
Japan - 54

Soooo- We have about as many people as police officers, we have a shitload more murders and we lock up 5 to 14 as many of our citizens per capita.

But, yeah, guns are all about "Freedom", man.

The fact that we have that many criminals running around re-enforces the need for an armed citizenry. Thanks for the data.

 

[daveman]

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

guns and accessories are given a grace period until april 2014. after that they can start to confiscate

So, daveman is full of shit?

No. Because nowhere did I claim that guns are being confiscated.

I correctly pointed out that registration leads to confiscation, despite the lies by irrational gun-haters.

The NYPD has announced its intention to confiscate, as the letter shows. Hint: "Voluntarily" giving property up to avoid punitive government action IS confiscation.

 

[JoeB131]

[


As I thought: The liberal is presented with the fact that his laws didn't work, and in fact made the situation worse.

And his solution, as always, is: Try MORE liberalism! More government control and restriction on law-abiding people! Yeah, that'll do it. Then the criminals will act nicer!

Tell me, little joeb131. Are you assuming your total gun ban will suddenly start to disarm the lawbreakers (and who gives a damn what it does to law-abiding people)... because of the "success" of previous national bans?

You mean previous national bans in Canada, the UK, Japan, Germany, etc. The ones that worked just fine. Because we've never TRIED a "national" ban in this country.

Are you trying to admire how successful the ban on alcohol was in the 1920s and 30s? and how crime fell as a result?

(All it did, was turn large numbers of law-abiding Americans into criminals, and give organized crime the start they needed by creating a HUGE black market, resulting in a crime wave the nation had never seen before.)

The problem with Prohibition is that no one really knew what was being passed. They all thought it was a patriotic law to deal with them Germans and other Foreign immigrants in their Taverns suring WWI. In fact, while prohibition had been passed in 1919, no one really tried to enforce it until the 1920s.. Then they realized what a huge mistake they made.

Incidently, prohibition did work VERY well outside of Chicago. Alcohol consumption decreased considerably. Brewerys and Winerys were put out of business and there just wasn't that much booze available.

And putting gunmakers out of business would be a lot easier.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The fact that we have that many criminals running around re-enforces the need for an armed citizenry. Thanks for the data.

Well, no, it shows that when you run prisons as a For-Profit Business, you end up locking up a lot of people for bullshit.

 

[daveman]

So, daveman is full of shit?

no, daveman is right. he is talking about another layer NYC specifically is trying to force through.

He's pointing to an illegal rifle, which holds more than 5 rounds.

So I ask again:

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

Oh, you're talking about the rifle that was legal before the law was passed by irrational gun-haters. The law that criminals will not obey.

THAT gun. The one that was perfectly legal the very second before the law went into effect.

 

[martybegan]

[


As I thought: The liberal is presented with the fact that his laws didn't work, and in fact made the situation worse.

And his solution, as always, is: Try MORE liberalism! More government control and restriction on law-abiding people! Yeah, that'll do it. Then the criminals will act nicer!

Tell me, little joeb131. Are you assuming your total gun ban will suddenly start to disarm the lawbreakers (and who gives a damn what it does to law-abiding people)... because of the "success" of previous national bans?

You mean previous national bans in Canada, the UK, Japan, Germany, etc. The ones that worked just fine. Because we've never TRIED a "national" ban in this country.

Are you trying to admire how successful the ban on alcohol was in the 1920s and 30s? and how crime fell as a result?

(All it did, was turn large numbers of law-abiding Americans into criminals, and give organized crime the start they needed by creating a HUGE black market, resulting in a crime wave the nation had never seen before.)

The problem with Prohibition is that no one really knew what was being passed. They all thought it was a patriotic law to deal with them Germans and other Foreign immigrants in their Taverns suring WWI. In fact, while prohibition had been passed in 1919, no one really tried to enforce it until the 1920s.. Then they realized what a huge mistake they made.

Incidently, prohibition did work VERY well outside of Chicago. Alcohol consumption decreased considerably. Brewerys and Winerys were put out of business and there just wasn't that much booze available.

And putting gunmakers out of business would be a lot easier.

What a fucking moron. NYC and all the other major cities were hotbeds of bootlegging and speakeasies. People got their alcohol, and criminals made a fortune providing it. We see the same thing with drug prohibitions.

Also, alcohol was NEVER a constitutionally mandated right. Something you keep ignoring you assclown.

 

[martybegan]

[

The fact that we have that many criminals running around re-enforces the need for an armed citizenry. Thanks for the data.

Well, no, it shows that when you run prisons as a For-Profit Business, you end up locking up a lot of people for bullshit.

Lol, nice excuse there cock-sucker.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

[

When the Police are the only ones with firearms ... You by definition have a Police State ... That is not paranoia. It is no harder to say 150 times than it is to say 160 times ... And I don't care who agrees with the incorrect answer.

Try again peanut ...

.

Ignoring your idiotic trying to parse the math question, (Pssst... Pssst- if you throw in the 1000 accidental gun deaths, it is 160 to one.) I actually am going to play with the 'We are in a police state" nonsense.

The other G-7 Countries either limit or ban guns. So are they police states? Let's look at these figures from wiki- Police officers per 100,000 people

List of countries by number of police officers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US 256
UK - 307
Canada - 202
France - 356
Italy - 417
Germany - 298
Japan 197

So , no, some of them have less cops, some have more, but we all have about the same amount, less than half a percent of our population engaged in being police. So much for a "police State".

Hey, but here's a better measure. How many of our people do we lock up per 100 K people.

List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US - 716
UK - 148
Canada - 114
France - 101
Italy - 108
Germany 80
Japan - 54

Soooo- We have about as many people as police officers, we have a shitload more murders and we lock up 5 to 14 as many of our citizens per capita.

But, yeah, guns are all about "Freedom", man.

That was hilarious, and demonstrated your complete lack of understanding of both math and politics.

 

[daveman]

He's pointing to an illegal rifle, which holds more than 5 rounds.

So I ask again:

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

a law that makes a gun illegal soley for the reason of being able to hold more than 5 rounds is infringement, and unconsitutional. NYC is breaking the law by trying to enforce it, but of course our pussy society doesnt call them on it.

So I have to assume the NYPD will follow the same law with thier rifles and such? oh wait, they won't because they are fucking hypocrites.

So, like I said, daveman is full of shit.

No legal guns are being confiscated, and this is just another whiny butthurt wingnut thread.

Your posts are now limited to 5 words or less. You have until midnight to edit any posts of yours that are over the 5-word limit. Failure to do so will result in punitive action.

Now screech how that's different. I dare you.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Have any of you rightwing nitwits ever considered politely responding to Joe that Americans aren’t required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a Constitutional right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed exercise that right?

And have you conservative morons considered explaining to Joe that although he’s likely correct with regard to the data and statistics he relates with regard to gun deaths and violence, that ‘banning’ guns or even imposing additional restrictions won’t address gun deaths and violence, anymore than ‘banning’ abortion will stop that practice?

Last, have any of you on the idiotic right considered that the above approach will make others perceive you as thoughtful and responsible concerning the issue of guns, as opposed to crazy and irresponsible, as you’re perceived now?

Or you can continue with the usual conservative stupidity.

 

[daveman]

[

When the Police are the only ones with firearms ... You by definition have a Police State ... That is not paranoia. It is no harder to say 150 times than it is to say 160 times ... And I don't care who agrees with the incorrect answer.

Try again peanut ...

.

Ignoring your idiotic trying to parse the math question, (Pssst... Pssst- if you throw in the 1000 accidental gun deaths, it is 160 to one.) I actually am going to play with the 'We are in a police state" nonsense.

Don't bother, because you got that wrong, too, dumbass. BlackSand didn't say we're in a Police State

Currently, the police are NOT the only people with firearms, so we're not a Police State.

However, you have said you want the police to be the ONLY people who have firearms.

Therefore, you WANT a Police State.

You suck at logic just as badly as you suck at everything else. Dumbass.

 

[martybegan]

Have any of you rightwing nitwits ever considered politely responding to Joe that Americans aren’t required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a Constitutional right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed exercise that right?

And have you conservative morons considered explaining to Joe that although he’s likely correct with regard to the data and statistics he relates with regard to gun deaths and violence, that ‘banning’ guns or even imposing additional restrictions won’t address gun deaths and violence, anymore than ‘banning’ abortion will stop that practice?

Last, have any of you on the idiotic right considered that the above approach will make others perceive you as thoughtful and responsible concerning the issue of guns, as opposed to crazy and irresponsible, as you’re perceived now?

Or you can continue with the usual conservative stupidity.

I can respond nicely if I want to, you condescending fucktard. however certain people, such as Joe and yourself, do not deserve such a response, and thus I reply with disdain and insults, as you have earned them.

And of course, as always, go fuck yourself.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Also, alcohol was NEVER a constitutionally mandated right. Something you keep ignoring you assclown.

Neither are guns...
There's something in there about Militias, though.

 

[JoeB131]

[

When the Police are the only ones with firearms ... You by definition have a Police State ... That is not paranoia. It is no harder to say 150 times than it is to say 160 times ... And I don't care who agrees with the incorrect answer.

Try again peanut ...

.

Ignoring your idiotic trying to parse the math question, (Pssst... Pssst- if you throw in the 1000 accidental gun deaths, it is 160 to one.) I actually am going to play with the 'We are in a police state" nonsense.

Don't bother, because you got that wrong, too, dumbass. BlackSand didn't say we're in a Police State

Currently, the police are NOT the only people with firearms, so we're not a Police State.

However, you have said you want the police to be the ONLY people who have firearms.

Therefore, you WANT a Police State.

You suck at logic just as badly as you suck at everything else. Dumbass.

I like how you edited the post so you could avoid the point, guy.

The point is, all those other countries have banned guns, have less cops than we have, have less prisoners and less murder, and they aren't police states, either.

 

[daveman]

[

The fact that we have that many criminals running around re-enforces the need for an armed citizenry. Thanks for the data.

Well, no, it shows that when you run prisons as a For-Profit Business, you end up locking up a lot of people for bullshit.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovwxBrIBj1w]Jim Carey - Legal Advice - YouTube[/ame]