Oregon Gunman: Conservative Republican

[candycorn]

You never told us; where are all the bills to repeal Obama care? The GOP seems to be scared little bitches---you guys were so brave a few months ago. What happened?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Nothing in my plan does one thing to affect firearms that have already been purchased unless they are used in a crime. If you have 3 guns, 30 guns, 300 guns or 3,000 guns on hand and you're a private individual, you needn't purchase anything new except ammo when you run out.

Now if you wanted to sell the gun to someone, they would have to acquire an insurance policy and so on and so fourth.

Hmm.... So once again, a Leftist comes to inform us that tolerance of their cult, requires Americans Insure ourselves against the liabilities associated with the product of their unprincipled behavior?

At some point, it will become clear that the better solution is to simply stop tolerating their cult... remove their means to participate in US Government, strip them of all subsidy and shut them out of any means to communicate with the public at large and within fairly short order... the liabilities associated with the tolerating of the mental disorder that is Relativism, will just dry up and blow away.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sure it does. Price goes up, sales go down.

I already have my gun, why would the price go up?

Nothing in my plan does one thing to affect firearms that have already been purchased unless they are used in a crime. If you have 3 guns, 30 guns, 300 guns or 3,000 guns on hand and you're a private individual, you needn't purchase anything new except ammo when you run out.

Now if you wanted to sell the gun to someone, they would have to acquire an insurance policy and so on and so fourth.

The insurance is for the victim.
The victim gets $1000? Big deal.

As stated, the device is not really an insurance policy; it acts more like a convertible annuity at this point. If the gun is used in a crime, the system could be set up to where they would receive more since there is a State match going on.

The only thing they receive now is a bill for a funeral (likely on top of a medical bill). So "big deal" is exactly that in some cases.

I love the callusness of the gun crazies; it highlights who has society's best interest at heart and who is just out for themselves.

It also makes the theft a gun crime in addition to the use of the weapon to shoot someone.

It's already against the law to steal a gun and shoot someone.

We all know that State crimes are ineffective due to paroles, probation, good behavior, etc... Federal boys don't play that way. Being 7 states away to where you see nobody from da hood for 10 years is probably a good thing. Now that will change as Fed pens fill up. You're likely to see someone from the old neighborhood. But the old "all the comforts of home" bullshit has to stop. I also think that once we stop incarcerating people for smoking tree and frankly "grow up" as a nation, you'll see more room in the prisons and more robust prosecutions of those who deserve it.

I suggest you ask someone with a State pension what their contributions are matched at. Mine was 225% back at Harris County Texas.

The gun owner is not an employee. The state is not going to match his "bond" based on a Federal law. Do you think a broke state, like Illinois, has an extra $9000 to cough up after 10 years? Or even a state with a balanced budget?

This is a valid concern. There are budgetary pressures that can't be ignored. Smaller population states (those that do not have the same pension commitments) may have to carry the water for a while on this.

But if you wish to make the term longer--lets say 20 years or make the cap $7,500 or $5K in 10 that is still a 13% return if you did the math right--that's cool.

Nope. A 13% return for 10 years only gets you to about $3400.

Well, you brought up 26%; I didn't put pen to paper on it.

Now if you wanted to sell the gun to someone, they would have to acquire an insurance policy and so on and so fourth.

And what if we don't tell anyone he bought the gun?

Gun crime. Pack your bags.

As stated, the device is not really an insurance policy; it acts more like a convertible annuity at this point.

Yes, something else to drive our states bankrupt.

Chicken little has make an appearance.

So "big deal" is exactly that in some cases.
Yes, $1000 is a big help with huge medical bills. Or funerals. LOL!

I love the callusness of the gun crazies
I love the idiocy of the lefties.

Better to have a bleeding heart than none at all. I guess "stuff happens" is enough to suffice.

Well, you brought up 26%; I didn't put pen to paper on it.

Obviously. Lefties are horrible at math.

I used your figure of 26 percent. I guess you're a lefty.

Gun crime. Pack your bags.

What crime?

Chicken little has make an appearance.

A million gun "annuities" will cost Illinois $9 billion in 10 years. We can't afford it. No thanks.

Better to have a bleeding heart than none at all.

Yes, your good intentions are the important thing, even if your policy makes things worse.

I used your figure of 26 percent.


Yes, the return you'd need for 10 years to achieve your $10,000 result. It would never happen.
The fact that you think cutting the return to 13% for 10 years would give you $5,000, is
just more proof that liberals are really bad at math.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You never told us; where are all the bills to repeal Obama care? The GOP seems to be scared little bitches---you guys were so brave a few months ago. What happened?

Obama needs more to whine about? Isn't he busy losing the Middle East to Putin?

 

[candycorn]

Gun crime. Pack your bags.
What crime?

Selling a gun to a buyer without an insurance policy.

Chicken little has make an appearance.
A million gun "annuities" will cost Illinois $9 billion in 10 years. We can't afford it. No thanks.

Your assumption will be that they are held for the full length. Won't happen. Your assumption is that the investments made off of the policies purchased will be $0.00. We're talking billions of new capital for investments; paying off debts, etc...

Better to have a bleeding heart than none at all.
Yes, your good intentions are the important thing, even if your policy makes things worse.

The status quo is "good" in your book is it? Let's hear your plan.

 

[dannyboys]

Do you in your right mind believe increasing the price of a handgun would somehow have an effect on the people who are committing the most gun murders?].

I removed the racist bullshit to respond to your idiocy without the cloud of your ignorance.

Okay...your argument is increasing the price of an object will have no affect on it's availability.
Look out the window; Do you know why there are no Porsches or Ferarri's in sight? Is it because there is no demand? No, the price is too high to be afforded.

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

That there IS funny pal!
When I look out MY window I do in fact see MY fucking Panamera sitting in MY driveway. I bought the driveway And the Panamera with my own money.
Do you really believe the vast percentage of murders committed using a hand gun are going to go down because the person who bought the gun paid more for it so there will be less guns for young negro men to steal and then murder their fucking cousin with it is somehow affected by what the the original owner paid for the gun?
You're an idiot.
You're totally missing the point. People with MONEY! buy guns. These people don't give a shit if the price has gone up 10%. I don't. Breaking News! These people are by percent of the population law abiding peaceful citizens who only wish to live in peace and safety. They are not feral Tree Dweller sub-humans.
People without MONEY steal the fucking guns. These people are coinsidently the very same people AKA young negro men who commit the vast % of gun related murders.
Or haven't you ever heard about a little place called Chicago?
Oh ya. It's spelled Ferrari genius not Ferarri.
When 13% of the population stop committing over 50% of the violent crimes in the US you can refer to me as a 'racist'.
Until then you may refer to me as a 'realist'.
Enjoy your cat food sandwich.

 

[candycorn]

Do you in your right mind believe increasing the price of a handgun would somehow have an effect on the people who are committing the most gun murders?].

I removed the racist bullshit to respond to your idiocy without the cloud of your ignorance.

Okay...your argument is increasing the price of an object will have no affect on it's availability.
Look out the window; Do you know why there are no Porsches or Ferarri's in sight? Is it because there is no demand? No, the price is too high to be afforded.

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

That there IS funny pal!
When I look out MY window I do in fact see MY fucking Panamera sitting in MY driveway. I bought the driveway And the Panamera with my own money.

Of course you do. Everyone on this board is an eccentric billionaire. I see two of them outside of my window.
Not much here worth responding to really. Your ignorance is profound.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Gun crime. Pack your bags.
What crime?

Selling a gun to a buyer without an insurance policy.

Chicken little has make an appearance.
A million gun "annuities" will cost Illinois $9 billion in 10 years. We can't afford it. No thanks.

Your assumption will be that they are held for the full length. Won't happen. Your assumption is that the investments made off of the policies purchased will be $0.00. We're talking billions of new capital for investments; paying off debts, etc...

Better to have a bleeding heart than none at all.
Yes, your good intentions are the important thing, even if your policy makes things worse.

The status quo is "good" in your book is it? Let's hear your plan.

Selling a gun to a buyer without an insurance policy.

Nobody knows I have a gun, how will they know I sold it?

Your assumption will be that they are held for the full length. Won't happen.

Doesn't matter, Illinois can't afford to pay 26% a year on an "annuity".
They can't even pay their current bills.

Your assumption is that the investments made off of the policies purchased will be $0.00.

Your assumption was the state can magically "match" the cost. LOL!

We're talking billions of new capital for investments; paying off debts, etc...

Oh, they'll use the $1000 to build a road or a hospital and when I come back for the $10,000?
Or they'll pay off an 8% debt to incur a 26% debt? LOL!
Your math is weak.

The status quo is "good" in your book is it?

The status quo is better than your "annuity" idea.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A poll tax is okay, because it doesn't infringe on anyone's right to vote.

???

If a tax on guns does not infringe, neither does a tax on voting.

If the manufacturers double the price of all guns, is that an infringement? Quadruples the price? Does what that pharmaceutical guy did, bumping the price from $13 to $750?

If the manufacturers double the price of all guns, is that an infringement?

Is the manufacturer the government?

Uh...no. That's why I'm asking you if you think that would also be an infringement.

The 2nd Amendment applies to actions by the government, not the people, and so even if a price hike is an "infringement", the Constitution does not come into play.
You've been told this before; I do not know why you refuse to understamd

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sure it does. Price goes up, sales go down.

I already have my gun, why would the price go up?

Nothing in my plan does one thing to affect firearms that have already been purchased...

And so will do nothing to reduce the numbers of mass shootings.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If a tax on guns does not infringe, neither does a tax on voting.

If the manufacturers double the price of all guns, is that an infringement? Quadruples the price? Does what that pharmaceutical guy did, bumping the price from $13 to $750?

If the manufacturers double the price of all guns, is that an infringement?
Is the manufacturer the government?

Neither is the seller of the insurance I proposed.

The insurance is mandated by law, thus the government, through the mandate, infringes on the right.

Oh? Well, by that strange argument, the government, through mandating you have hot water in the bathroom or a padlock on the Sudafed increases the business owner's costs and therefore drives up the price of guns and,therefore, infringes!!!!

I see - you choose to not understand thee argument.
Sure sign that you know you cannot argue against it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Several mechanisms could be employed. I'm for using market forces to dry up the gun supply and reduce the violence.

Artificially driving up the price of guns isn't using "market forces".

Sure it is.

This is an outright lie.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

Artificially driving up prices through government action with the intent to limit the exercise of a right infringes upon the right.
Every time.

 

[dannyboys]

M14: "Oh, they'll use the $1000 to build a road or a hospital and when I come back for the $10,000?
Or they'll pay off an 8% debt to incur a 26% debt? LOL!
Your math is weak."
'Candyass's math is "weak" b/c she has a ten year old's perception on a serious social problem ie how to prevent hundreds of young negro men from murdering other young negro men with the odd three year old victim thrown in.
She's our resident LIB crack pot.
Her idea is to have the government jack up the price of guns sales with the promise if the gun purchaser buys some sort of mumbo jumbo 'insurance plan the government will 'promise'
to pay what is basically a loan to the government a fantastic profit on their investment in TEN FUCKING YEARS!??????????????? so that the sales of guns will "dry up".
I've seen more sentient 'investment plans' in my Spam inbox from Nigeria for Christ's sake!
What a dummy!

 

[candycorn]

Selling a gun to a buyer without an insurance policy.
Nobody knows I have a gun, how will they know I sold it?

Good point. It highlights the inherent dishonesty involved in the guns rights groups.

Your assumption is that the investments made off of the policies purchased will be $0.00.
Your assumption was the state can magically "match" the cost. LOL!

Most states can. Every day people resign from State jobs. Some are vested, some are not. When they are not, they get a lump-sum payment (often times) for several thousand dollars. It's not as if the State is not equipped for the responsibility.

We're talking billions of new capital for investments; paying off debts, etc...

Oh, they'll use the $1000 to build a road or a hospital and when I come back for the $10,000?

The $1,000 per gun sales is a given. The $10,000 is going to be a % of the persons who purchased. I answered that already. What you're getting if you're the state is another revenue stream. What you're getting, if you're the public, is some assurance that if you're the victim of a gun crime, you'll get some compensation. What you're getting if you're the gun owner is an investment vehicle that will pay off a much higher return than most other investments.

Are there details to be worked out? Sure.

The status quo is "good" in your book is it?
The status quo is better than your "annuity" idea.

I see you prefer the monthly blood bath. Typical gun crazy.

 

[candycorn]

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

Artificially driving up prices through government action with the intent to limit the exercise of a right infringes upon the right.
Every time.

Now you're having to prove intent....good luck with that.
The intent is to limit the monthly blood baths. It will do that over time.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

Artificially driving up prices through government action with the intent to limit the exercise of a right infringes upon the right.
Every time.

Now you're having to prove intent....good luck with that.

You supplied the intent noted above - "drive the price up and you dry the pool out".

 

[candycorn]

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

Artificially driving up prices through government action with the intent to limit the exercise of a right infringes upon the right.
Every time.

Now you're having to prove intent....good luck with that.

You supplied the intent noted above - "drive the price up and you dry the pool out".

No, I stated a free market truth.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Drive the price up and you dry the pool out.

Artificially driving up prices through government action with the intent to limit the exercise of a right infringes upon the right.
Every time.

Now you're having to prove intent....good luck with that.

You supplied the intent noted above - "drive the price up and you dry the pool out".

No, I stated a free market truth.

Yes... and you intend to "dry the pool up" by artificiallry raising the cost of gun ownership.
Artificially driving up the cost of exercising a right through government action with the intent to limit the exercise of a right infringes upon the right.
Every time.
.

 

[dannyboys]

If so then explain why you are whining about the militia in regards the 2nd Amendment? The Court was clear one is NOT required to belong to the militia to have a protected right under the 2nd.

The Court was clear when it had those 9 justices. The resulting bloodbath every month may compel some to change the ruling. This is why it is important to elect HRC. You get rid of Scalia and a few other dinosaurs....boom; you get legislation that will stem the red tide.

Again, it is humorous how you guys bitch and moan about judicial activsm but cling to it to in this case.

KItten.....We're discussing a Constitutional amendment. Which requires 38 state legislatures to ratify an amendment which repeals an existing amendment. in any event, there is no court, no legislature that can stop people from killing. And you will never disarm the law abiding citizens who choose to exercise their rights. Never. Get it?
And of you think Clinton is going to get the opportunity to pack the court with hyper liberals, you're living in a parallel universe.
BTW, Clinton's polling numbers are terrible. Short of some kind of unbelievable turn around, Clinton is not going to win the WH...And don't go spewing that crap about electoral votes.
But.....You are a feminazi who arrogantly believes the election is over. That it is "her turn".....
There is a bunch of you. But not enough.
BTW, until "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is stricken from the Bill of Rights, you will never have your way.

Time will tell.

Clinton will win the nomination easily. General elections are always a toss up but the GOP is doing it's best to lose it.

A Hillary 'cloud' server has just been uncovered. Let's wait and see what the FBI finds on it before we 'anoint' Hillary shall we?

There was a line in the movie, The Right Stuff. It was a favorite in my house growing up and I remember my cousins coming over and watching it all the time in our old Sears VHS. Anyway, the scene is in this bar and the Chuck Yeager had just broken the sound barrier. Then another guy broke his record by a few mph. Then Yeager broke his record. Then the other guy re-gained the title of "fastest man alive".... When Yeager broke the record, the press was fanatical. Now the air force base was empty and nobody was covering them.

The "Liaison Man" pointed out to the pilots that the reason the press coverage had waned wasn't that their feats were not great but that for something to capture the public imagination; it needed to be a simple message; he cited the four minute mile, sixty homers; in short, a nice round number. This is the issue with Hillary's e-mails and the obsession the GOP has with it. The public isn't going to care unless she is frog-marched into a court-house. She should be ashamed for going the route of convenience and the ham-handed way she sees enemies behind every bush and looks to defend against foes who have zero real ammo. But the public isn't going to care unless there is a skin on the wall. The GOP didn't get there with Whitewater, "file gate", Ben-Gotcha, and it looks like the e-mail server is going to be a dud also.

Selling a gun to a buyer without an insurance policy.
Nobody knows I have a gun, how will they know I sold it?

Good point. It highlights the inherent dishonesty involved in the guns rights groups.

Your assumption is that the investments made off of the policies purchased will be $0.00.
Your assumption was the state can magically "match" the cost. LOL!

Most states can. Every day people resign from State jobs. Some are vested, some are not. When they are not, they get a lump-sum payment (often times) for several thousand dollars. It's not as if the State is not equipped for the responsibility.

We're talking billions of new capital for investments; paying off debts, etc...

Oh, they'll use the $1000 to build a road or a hospital and when I come back for the $10,000?

The $1,000 per gun sales is a given. The $10,000 is going to be a % of the persons who purchased. I answered that already. What you're getting if you're the state is another revenue stream. What you're getting, if you're the public, is some assurance that if you're the victim of a gun crime, you'll get some compensation. What you're getting if you're the gun owner is an investment vehicle that will pay off a much higher return than most other investments.

Are there details to be worked out? Sure.

The status quo is "good" in your book is it?
The status quo is better than your "annuity" idea.

I see you prefer the monthly blood bath. Typical gun crazy.

Would you like to go the 'sun room' now?
How would you stop the daily blood-bath in every fucking inner city shit hole in the country?
Anyone with a hundred bucks can buy an illegal gun in any inner city shit hole in the country.
Come on genius. Let's hear your wisdom. Specifics please. Not your usual bumbo jumbo bullshit.
Your man BOBO is waiting also. He's never even bothered trying to stop the blood baths.