No one is going to take your guns

[JoeB131]

[

I'm sorry, guy, when did you try being civil with me.

Several times. Your problem is you believe that anything less than immediate and unquestioning acceptance and endorsement of everything you say is an attack.

You're thin-skinned. You take disagreement personally. You're no different from other progressives.

Guy, you're the one is unbalanced in these debates, not me.

Every time I talk to you, you are rude, condescending and try to make the discussion about me rather than the topic.

Ummm...it's not me who brings up my pension, loser.

Well, you are the one who INSISTS that we are soo broke we have to starve hungry children. Put your money where your mouth is.

Also, what is so crazy about doing EXACTLY what every other industrialized nation has already done.

Because none of the other nations you want to emulate has the individual right to keep and bear arms codified as a natural right in their establishing documents.

And spare me your usual deliberate misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment. You simply get it wrong. Deal with it. And no, you'll never be coming for anyone's weapons. That's just plain stupid.

NOthing in the Second Amendment that can't be cured with a Sharpie...

Eventually, people are going to get sick of you gun nuts and your bullshit.

 

[JoeB131]

Evasion noted. Tap-dancing noted. Again: Please explain, in detail, how a 4'5", 90lb woman is supposed to fend off a 6'3", 250lb rapist if she is unarmed. Be specific.

I know you'll keep tap-dancing, but I have to try anyway, on the off chance you might actually answer a question...

I was very specific.

80% of rape victims are raped by people they know.

Making the gun point completely irrelevent.

It never happens.

 

[daveman]

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.

Good Gaea, you're a dumb motherfucker.

You want a police state. That's the point.

NO, I want a society without nuts with guns.

Why do you lie so often?

Disarm everyone except the police.

Since you gun nuts won't control yourselves, I have no problem taking everyone's guns.

Problem solved.

YOU won't do anything. You're a big pussy.

 

[JoeB131]

You want a police state. That's the point.

NO, I want a society without nuts with guns.

Since you gun nuts won't control yourselves, I have no problem taking everyone's guns.

Problem solved.

Translation:
I don't want a Police State ... I want a Police State because y'all are crazy law abiding citizens and aren't shooting anybody ... So we need to take your guns away.

Just admit it Joe ... You are trying to give PMZ a run for the money.

.

Not at all.

You don't need a gun. Period.

There's no reason for the rest of to tolerate you having them if you can't control yourselves.

 

[daveman]

[
They were all off-duty, and were carrying their own personal weapons.

You know, the kind of weapons you would forbid.

So -- you failed. Yet again.

If nobody has guns, nobody needs them.

The point is, these were TRAINED PROFESSIONALS, not yahoos out there with a gun playing "George Zimmerman".

Please explain, in detail, how a 4'5", 90lb woman is supposed to fend off a 6'3", 250lb rapist if she is unarmed. Be specific.

For the record, the correct method would be: aim at center mass and fire until the threat is neutralized.

PinkoJoe thinks it's morally superior for her to be raped and murdered.

 

[daveman]

Have any of you rightwing nitwits ever considered politely responding

Noticed this tidbit as I scanned some of the posts. So cute.

It's different...somehow...it just is!!...when Jonesy does it.

You're just not nuanced enough to understand.

Right, Jonesy?

 

[BlackSand]

NOthing in the Second Amendment that can't be cured with a Sharpie...
Eventually, people are going to get sick of you gun nuts and your bullshit.

Is anybody taking odds on when poor Joe goes China Syndrome on us?
It doesn't look like it will be all that long before goes all Adam Lanza on us ... I just hope he doesn't have a firearm.

I am betting it will be before Friday when he completely loses it.
Is it my turn to bring the popcorn or what?

.

 

[Pogo]

So we should just let the shooter keep firing until he's out of ammo?

Uh... no. We should remove the shooter's incentive to blindly follow the religion of Almighty Gun in the first place.

The gun is merely a tool. If there was an effective, 100% ban of guns, crazy people bent on violence would find other tools.

Knives:
22 Kids Slashed in China Elementary School Knife Attack - ABC News

Machetes:
Kenya Machete Massacre Leaves 29 Dead

Homemade bombs:
Deadly bombs rock Boston marathon - CBS News

Cars:
Isla Vista massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


There is no religion of the gun. There is a culture of violence.

And there's the culture of irrational hatred of guns:

Why insist on removing people's means of self-defense?

Here's the flaw in your premise:

They're not "crazy people bent on violence". They're crazy people bent on and addicted to the idea of firearm carnage.

Knives don't do that. Machetes don't do that. Cars don't do that and bombs don't really do that in a way you can aim.

They're not even bent on murder. They're bent on carnage. The same kind of carnage they see in movies and video games that have desensitized them to the reality. The kind of carnage that creates a roomful of terrified victims screaming in tortured pain and flailing to get out of harm's way. The kind of action that allows them to target a single individual from far away. The kind of spectacle only a gun can deliver.

Gun violence isn't a legal issue. It never was. It's a psychological/cultural issue. It has little to do with our laws and a hell of a lot to do with our values.

I've been making this point since I got here a year ago. Y'all can now proceed to ignore it, and in a week or whatever I'll make it again, y'all can ignore that too, and go on pretending it's some kind of "gun grabber" issue, and we'll just do it all over again and nothing will change. It's easier than actually addressing the issue, innit?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Evasion noted. Tap-dancing noted. Again: Please explain, in detail, how a 4'5", 90lb woman is supposed to fend off a 6'3", 250lb rapist if she is unarmed. Be specific.

I know you'll keep tap-dancing, but I have to try anyway, on the off chance you might actually answer a question...

I was very specific.

80% of rape victims are raped by people they know.

Making the gun point completely irrelevent.

It never happens.

Are you or are you not now claiming that a woman being raped by a stranger HAS NEVER HAPPENED? If not...then as I knew you would, you're tap-dancing. If so...are you fuckin' STUPID, boy?!

 

[BlackSand]

You don't need a gun. Period.

Look city boy ... Don't tell me what I don't need when you don't have a clue.
Crap that lives in my back yard will kill you if you aren't careful or don't own a firearm.
You don't have a clue what you are talking about ... And the more you post ... The bigger fool you make of yourself.

.

 

[JoeB131]

If nobody has guns, nobody needs them.

The point is, these were TRAINED PROFESSIONALS, not yahoos out there with a gun playing "George Zimmerman".

Please explain, in detail, how a 4'5", 90lb woman is supposed to fend off a 6'3", 250lb rapist if she is unarmed. Be specific.

For the record, the correct method would be: aim at center mass and fire until the threat is neutralized.

PinkoJoe thinks it's morally superior for her to be raped and murdered.

I think it's kind of silly that we only have 200 cases of "justified homicide", against 19,000 suicides and 11,000 homicides, and we think this is a good tradeoff.

Generally, it isn't.

But here's the thing. Those countries without guns... they don't have as many rapes, either.

Oh, snap.

 

[Pogo]

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.

Sure you would, Madge.

 

[daveman]

[

I'm sorry, guy, when did you try being civil with me.

Several times. Your problem is you believe that anything less than immediate and unquestioning acceptance and endorsement of everything you say is an attack.

You're thin-skinned. You take disagreement personally. You're no different from other progressives.

Guy, you're the one is unbalanced in these debates, not me.

Uh huh. I'm not the one insisting we take away freedom from millions of people because I'm afraid of guns.

Sissy.

Well, you are the one who INSISTS that we are soo broke we have to starve hungry children. Put your money where your mouth is.

I would, if I'd ever said anything like that.

But you're a liar.

Also, what is so crazy about doing EXACTLY what every other industrialized nation has already done.

Because none of the other nations you want to emulate has the individual right to keep and bear arms codified as a natural right in their establishing documents.

And spare me your usual deliberate misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment. You simply get it wrong. Deal with it. And no, you'll never be coming for anyone's weapons. That's just plain stupid.

NOthing in the Second Amendment that can't be cured with a Sharpie...

Damn, but you sure do hate America. Why don't you move to one of the industrialized nations that you adore?

Oh, yeah -- their immigration laws probably won't let you in.

Too bad, you'll have to stay here and rage impotently that no one's going to give up their weapons because you're a pussy.

Eventually, people are going to get sick of you gun nuts and your bullshit.

Not in numbers great enough to do anything about it.

Suck it, loser.

 

[Geaux4it]

[

I'm sorry, guy, when did you try being civil with me.

Several times. Your problem is you believe that anything less than immediate and unquestioning acceptance and endorsement of everything you say is an attack.

You're thin-skinned. You take disagreement personally. You're no different from other progressives.

Guy, you're the one is unbalanced in these debates, not me.





Well, you are the one who INSISTS that we are soo broke we have to starve hungry children. Put your money where your mouth is.

Also, what is so crazy about doing EXACTLY what every other industrialized nation has already done.

Because none of the other nations you want to emulate has the individual right to keep and bear arms codified as a natural right in their establishing documents.

And spare me your usual deliberate misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment. You simply get it wrong. Deal with it. And no, you'll never be coming for anyone's weapons. That's just plain stupid.

NOthing in the Second Amendment that can't be cured with a Sharpie...

Eventually, people are going to get sick of you gun nuts and your bullshit.

You better hope the 'people' don't get sick of you anti-Americans first.

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

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.

Sure you would, Madge.

As I've said... the best argument for gun control is to let the gun nuts talk.

 

[daveman]

You don't need a gun. Period.

That's not for you to decide. Period.

 

[daveman]

Uh... no. We should remove the shooter's incentive to blindly follow the religion of Almighty Gun in the first place.

The gun is merely a tool. If there was an effective, 100% ban of guns, crazy people bent on violence would find other tools.

Knives:
22 Kids Slashed in China Elementary School Knife Attack - ABC News

Machetes:
Kenya Machete Massacre Leaves 29 Dead

Homemade bombs:
Deadly bombs rock Boston marathon - CBS News

Cars:
Isla Vista massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


There is no religion of the gun. There is a culture of violence.

And there's the culture of irrational hatred of guns:

Why insist on removing people's means of self-defense?

Here's the flaw in your premise:

They're not "crazy people bent on violence". They're crazy people bent on and addicted to the idea of firearm carnage.

Knives don't do that. Machetes don't do that. Cars don't do that and bombs don't really do that in a way you can aim.

They're not even bent on murder. They're bent on carnage. The same kind of carnage they see in movies and video games that have desensitized them to the reality. The kind of carnage that creates a roomful of terrified victims screaming in tortured pain and flailing to get out of harm's way. The kind of action that allows them to target a single individual from far away. The kind of spectacle only a gun can deliver.

Gun violence isn't a legal issue. It never was. It's a psychological/cultural issue. It has little to do with our laws and a hell of a lot to do with our values.

I've been making this point since I got here a year ago. Y'all can now proceed to ignore it, and in a week or whatever I'll make it again, y'all can ignore that too, and go on pretending it's some kind of "gun grabber" issue, and we'll just do it all over again and nothing will change. It's easier than actually addressing the issue, innit?

Yes, you're making a point.

Are you ever going to get around to proving it?

 

[daveman]

Please explain, in detail, how a 4'5", 90lb woman is supposed to fend off a 6'3", 250lb rapist if she is unarmed. Be specific.

For the record, the correct method would be: aim at center mass and fire until the threat is neutralized.

PinkoJoe thinks it's morally superior for her to be raped and murdered.

I think it's kind of silly that we only have 200 cases of "justified homicide", against 19,000 suicides and 11,000 homicides, and we think this is a good tradeoff.

Generally, it isn't.

But here's the thing. Those countries without guns... they don't have as many rapes, either.

Oh, snap.

Unsourced statistics are less than compelling.

 

[JoeB131]

In short, I don't like the fact that we have more violent crime in this country despite the prisons and the guns which haven't made us any safer... so let's pretend the informaiton is "unsourced".

 

[Geaux4it]

In short, I don't like the fact that we have more violent crime in this country despite the prisons and the guns which haven't made us any safer... so let's pretend the informaiton is "unsourced".

Like I have said in the past. Lock them up longer and throw away the key. Arm any law abiding citizen that desires to carry. Make it open season on criminals so they get the message.

The exact reason we have so many criminals is because we are not serious by ignoring the need for more strict consequences

-Geaux