🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Injured Anyway

That's a big assumption from such a small mind!
Says he who declares people need no more that 10 rounds to defend themselves and that a firearm loaded with nmore than 10 rounds is an offensive, rather than defensive weapon.
:eusa_clap:
The fact remains that more than ten rounds makes a weapon offensive rather than defensive.

And are you agreeing with the idiot who suggested to arm children?
 
Last edited:
Since the gun lovers offer no solutions to gun violence other than add more guns to the mix....
THis is, of course, a lie.
That, of course, makes you a liar.

Thank you for helping to prove that anti-gun loona can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Where's your solution to the problem of gun violence? Add more guns?!?
 
Since the gun lovers offer no solutions to gun violence other than add more guns to the mix....
THis is, of course, a lie.
That, of course, makes you a liar.

Thank you for helping to prove that anti-gun loona can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Where's your solution to the problem of gun violence? Add more guns?!?

The solution is to lock up violent criminals and abolish welfare - the government program for breeding criminals.
 
THis is, of course, a lie.
That, of course, makes you a liar.

Thank you for helping to prove that anti-gun loona can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Where's your solution to the problem of gun violence? Add more guns?!?

The solution is to lock up violent criminals and abolish welfare - the government program for breeding criminals.

I'm not advocating abolishing all welfare. But my suggestion that we lock up the violent felons, and keep them locked up, seems to be ignored by those wanting a solution to gun violence.
 
THis is, of course, a lie.
That, of course, makes you a liar.

Thank you for helping to prove that anti-gun loona can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Where's your solution to the problem of gun violence? Add more guns?!?

The solution is to lock up violent criminals and abolish welfare - the government program for breeding criminals.
Welfare does not breed criminals. You argue from opinion which is patently wrong.
 
Says he who declares people need no more that 10 rounds to defend themselves and that a firearm loaded with nmore than 10 rounds is an offensive, rather than defensive weapon.
:eusa_clap:
The fact remains that more than ten rounds makes a weapon offensive rather than defensive.

When and where has this so-called "fact" been demonstrated?
What other use, other than killing the most people inthe shortest period of time is a weapon with a magazine of greater than ten rounds? It is a weapon of war and a weapon used on offense.
 
Where's your solution to the problem of gun violence? Add more guns?!?

The solution is to lock up violent criminals and abolish welfare - the government program for breeding criminals.

I'm not advocating abolishing all welfare. But my suggestion that we lock up the violent felons, and keep them locked up, seems to be ignored by those wanting a solution to gun violence.
Keeping the criminals locked up is a solution after the fact. I believe we need a prophylactic solution to gun violence. There is a connection between guns and gun violence. And that connection must be broken.
 
That's a big assumption from such a small mind!
Says he who declares people need no more that 10 rounds to defend themselves and that a firearm loaded with nmore than 10 rounds is an offensive, rather than defensive weapon.
:eusa_clap:
The fact remains that more than ten rounds makes a weapon offensive rather than defensive.

And are you agreeing with the idiot who suggested to arm children?

Any firearm can be either offensive or defensive. The number of rounds it holds does not determine that.

A perfect example is the Beltway sniper. His rifle may have had the capacity to hold more rounds, but he only fired once and then left. His body count was greater than the "mass shooting" in Kennesaw yesterday.

That shooting, BTW, was done using a shotgun. Now I cannot find any mention of the type of shotgun, but very few removeable magazines, and even fewer of those hold more than 10 rounds. By far the most common shotguns are pump actions, with a capacity of between 5 and 8 rounds. And still the shooter used one for a "mass shooting".
 
Here's my solution. A complete ban on all weapons with semiautomatic firing systems.
There no rational reason to do this.
There's also no way to argue that doing so is constitutional.
Your "solution" fails.

The right of the people to live without the fear of semi automatic guns discharged in schools, churches, places of business and the streets trumps the right of anyone to own such weapons.

There is no right to live without fear, anymore than there is a right to not be afraid of being hit by hurricane or a tornado. guaranteeing such a right would turn this country into a police state. Of course, that's exactly what servile toadies like you want.
 
The fact remains that more than ten rounds makes a weapon offensive rather than defensive.

When and where has this so-called "fact" been demonstrated?
What other use, other than killing the most people inthe shortest period of time is a weapon with a magazine of greater than ten rounds? It is a weapon of war and a weapon used on offense.

That does not preclude that it is a defensive weapon. Unless your attackers stand in the open and let you shoot them, having more rounds may mean the difference between surviving the attack and being a statistic.

If the perpetrators take cover (even if there are only one or two), the extra rounds will serve to keep them under cover until the police arrive.

And, as I have pointed out before, reloading a semi-automatic takes very little time. So the difference between having 8 rounds or 18 rounds will make little difference for an attacker.
 
The solution is to lock up violent criminals and abolish welfare - the government program for breeding criminals.

I'm not advocating abolishing all welfare. But my suggestion that we lock up the violent felons, and keep them locked up, seems to be ignored by those wanting a solution to gun violence.
Keeping the criminals locked up is a solution after the fact. I believe we need a prophylactic solution to gun violence. There is a connection between guns and gun violence. And that connection must be broken.

:eusa_liar:
 
The solution is to lock up violent criminals and abolish welfare - the government program for breeding criminals.

I'm not advocating abolishing all welfare. But my suggestion that we lock up the violent felons, and keep them locked up, seems to be ignored by those wanting a solution to gun violence.
Keeping the criminals locked up is a solution after the fact. I believe we need a prophylactic solution to gun violence. There is a connection between guns and gun violence. And that connection must be broken.

You cannot remove firearms from the hands of the criminals. They will get them via the blackmarket or from the street. We have 500,000 illegal immigrants walking into the US every year. We have countless tons of illegal drugs being smuggled into the country every year. Firearms can be obtained by the same methods.

But the criminals themselves can be locked away. As I have shown you before, the majority of violent felons are rearrested within 5 years. Keep them locked up and you will lower the gun violence rate far more than any ban on individual types of weapons.
 
The majority of gun deaths take place in the cities, among minorities, mostly in minority neighborhoods.

I think we should take that high power spotlight that the anti-gun zealots are waving around, and shine it right...there....
 
It seems to me there's a connection between poor mijnorities and violence that needs to be broken.

How about start there?

Then you can attack the remaining 2 percent of the population that are the legal gun owners...
 
What other use, other than killing the most people inthe shortest period of time is a weapon with a magazine of greater than ten rounds? It is a weapon of war and a weapon used on offense.

Apparently this strange person thinks that if a guy is robbing my store, and I pull out a gun that has an eight-round magazine, the guy will run away or surrender. But if I pull out a gun that has a twelve-round mag, they guy will apparently stop, count the rounds in the mag, and then go right on robbing the store. Because a gun with a twelve-round mag isn't a defensive weapon.

Boy, when these liberals lose a debate, they start coming up with the screwiest "facts" imaginable. And they actually think they DON'T look ridiculous to normal people. :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
Takes soooooo long to reload a semi automatic firearm...:doubt:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxzrahUUTi8

Yes I'm sure that guy is just joe average shooter. And he's reloading in such a stressful situation too. He doesn't even appear to be shooting. Great video. Here's one of the average good guy with a gun.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rGnMKszxg]Man Shoots Himself - YouTube[/ame]

Here is a better example of why we need magazine capacity limits
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORXVOl378g]hk45 shooting drill with reload fail - YouTube[/ame]
And even in this example he's not exactly in a high stress situation, just shooting at targets. Any number of things can happen at reload including dropping the magazine. I prefer not to make it easy for the mass shooter. Mass shooters are the only ones using hi capacity magazines, defense is 2-3 shots.
 

Forum List

Back
Top