Premila Lal, 18, shot dead after jumping out of closet to surprise friend

[JoeB131]

Guy, you keep making up these stories about all the things you own, and all I can picture is that double wide you probably live in.

 

[skookerasbil]

So to Recap. Accidental shootings, about 800 a year. Tragic for the families involved but hardly earth shattering in number.

Law of the land. It is an individual right to own possess and bear firearms and can not be infringed by Government. And no requirement to belong to a Militia.

Crazy people are barred from owning firearms. This requires a Judges ruling and requires local authorities to do their jobs.

Felons are barred from owning firearms.

Background checks are required on all transactions with a licensed dealer no matter if at a gun show or where.

Gun deaths are still happening, the laws you cite are inadeqate, we need tougher laws.

To recap.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNb34vPqrN0#at=257]Debating A Gun Control Fanatic - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JoeB131]

Spambot shows up, adding nothing to the conversation.

 

[skookerasbil]

Do banning guns and increasing laws banning guns reduce murder and crime?







Not according to recently concluded research at Harvard University ( April 2013). They concluded with 100% certainty:


more guns = less crime


A summary of their conclusions >>>>


Many people believe that owning guns only increases the amount of crime. However, a recent study published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy concluded that there is a negative correlation between gun ownership and violent crime in countries internationally. In other words, the more guns the less crime. The study showed that nations with strict gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates than those who do not. In fact, the 9 European nations with the lowest gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate that is three times that of the nine European nations with the highest gun ownership rate.






Here is the full paper that decimates the emotional rants of the gun grabbing nutters >>>

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

 

[JoeB131]

Still adding nothing to the conversation.

Can you try to relevently address the issue in the post, instead of just spamming the same repeated gun-nut propaganda?

How is it a good thing that this guy shot this young lady?

 

[skookerasbil]

So.......as we can see >>>>

 

[skookerasbil]

I love posting up that Harvard study ( see above) that provides the ultimate ball kick to the gun grabbing Nazi's who allow their emotions to rule their lives!!!

[/URL][/IMG]





University study results > gun grabber speculation

 

[JoeB131]

[

The RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS is a right not a privilage.

There are no rights. It can't be a right if it can be taken away from you. Any fool who thinks he has "rights" needs to look up "Japanese-Americans, 1942".

What we have are privilages the rest of society accepts that you have. Unless, of course, you abuse them.

[
Why does no one need a gun?
What about self defense?

We have 32,000 gun deaths in this country every year, only 200 of which are ruled as "justified" uses of force by civilians defending themselves. The solution is far worse than the problem.

[
If all these other countries are so much better than the USA why don't you live in them?

Because I don't speak Japanese.

More to the point, why should I have to live with crazy people with guns because you are a scared, paranoid little man?

[
We are tired of your treasonous anti American posts.
You hate America and love shitholes, instead of moving to your beloved shitholes you prefer to turn the USA into a shithole and make all your countrymen as fucking miserable as you?
Traitor.

Guy, I was in the military for 11 years, and I was not fighting for the right of crazy people to shoot up schools and theatres. Clearly, you guys have no interest in stopping that from happening.

 

[JoeB131]

Guy, you keep making up these stories about all the things you own, and all I can picture is that double wide you probably live in.

Show evidence then!!
I will post my social to assist you if you wish, did it before but they deleted it.

As well they should. Anyone who would post his social on an internet board has some serious mental issues.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Because he thought she was attacking him.
If he had no gun and he was killed by an attacker, how would that be a good thing?
Or the 13 month old murdered in his stroller, if his mother was armed, he would be alive today.
How is the death of a 13 month old a good thing?
The woman in Georgia who shot a home invader 6 times in the face, he survived, do you think she and her son would after he had finished raping them to death?
Why is it a good thing for families to be raped to death?
Fucking dope!!

Again, for every time a gun stops a crime, 160 times it is the cause of a crime.

It's like filling your yard with rattlesnakes to chase off intruders, and then wonder why they bite the neighbors and kids.

Guns aren't the solution, they are the problem. Too many people have them, too few know how to use them properly.

 

[JoeB131]

Show evidence then!!
I will post my social to assist you if you wish, did it before but they deleted it.

As well they should. Anyone who would post his social on an internet board has some serious mental issues.

How the fuck would you know?
You qualified in any way to make such an accusation?
Bank details, the lot.
No harm to me.
That fucker shut up PDQ.

It's perfectly safe to do so.
Retards don't get it!!

Guy, you see, this is why I don't take you at face value. A name and a social is really all a crook needs to rob you blind.

 

[skookerasbil]

epic losing..........


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNb34vPqrN0#at=257]Debating A Gun Control Fanatic - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JoeB131]

[

Because he thought she was attacking him.
If he had no gun and he was killed by an attacker, how would that be a good thing?
Or the 13 month old murdered in his stroller, if his mother was armed, he would be alive today.
How is the death of a 13 month old a good thing?
The woman in Georgia who shot a home invader 6 times in the face, he survived, do you think she and her son would after he had finished raping them to death?
Why is it a good thing for families to be raped to death?
Fucking dope!!

Again, for every time a gun stops a crime, 160 times it is the cause of a crime.

It's like filling your yard with rattlesnakes to chase off intruders, and then wonder why they bite the neighbors and kids.

Guns aren't the solution, they are the problem. Too many people have them, too few know how to use them properly.

List the 160 crimes this gun committed?

Boston.com

YOu miss the point, as usual.

200 cases of justified homicide with guns by civilians...

vs.

11,101 murders.

19,501 suicides.

800 accidents.

or roughly, 32,000 wrongful deaths with guns versus 200 rightful deaths.

It's really all about the math, guy, and the math isn't on your side.

 

[JoeB131]

Spambot trying to get someone to pay attention to it.

 

[JoeB131]

[

You were in the military for 11 years and just a page or two ago said you wouldn't own a gun because?............?
After 11 years in the military??
You never served at all liar.
All branches of the US military qualify on( at least) a rifle and a handgun.

Not true. The only weapons I HAD to qualify on in my MOS (76Y30) was a the M16 rifle. There was no requirement to qualify on pistols or machine guns, although I have also fired the M1911A1, M60 and M2. I fired an M203 Grenade Launcher once.

But here's the thing. That was a job where needing a gun was required by the job.

There was no need for me to have one in my home and I didn't. Nor have I handled a gun in the last 21 years since I left. No need to.

[
Oh and your stats that only 200 crimes are prevented by guns, only 200 self defense gun uses a year?

Bullshit.
200 deaths of criminals killed by their victims defending themselves.

Tens of thousands of cases exist where a gun was used in self defense and the criminal was injured.
Or the criminal was challenged at gunpoint and left.

There are also hundreds of thousands of cases where domestic abusers threatened their spouses, kids and neighbors with guns without shooting them. (Like your hero, George Zimmerman, apparently.) There are 78,000 cases a year of guns injuring people.

[
All those lives saved because of freedom.
If you ban guns the death rates of victims will increase immensely.
Gun crime will grow 26 fold, just like it did in DC.

Except every other industrialized country has limited or banned gun ownership, and crime rates dropped.

Now, you use DC as an example, but here's the thing. DC is right next to Virginia, which has the most lax gun laws in the country. To the point where other states complain (rightfully) that their lax gun laws have contributed to their crime rates. (something like 30% of guns used in crimes in NYC started out in VA.)

So I will concede, municiple bans aren'te effective. You need a national ban.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh looked it up!!
"You wouldn't trust you with a gun"
After 11 years military service?
Mmmmmm

I was an expert with my primary individual weapon and my secondary individual weapon at the end of phase 2 training.
Competent with the GIMPY, 51mm mortar and the 94mm LAW.

At the end of my 16 years I was more than competent on most weapon systems out there.

So to me, something in your little pack of lies don't quite ring true......

Oh, wait, at 43 you were a vastly successful businessman, lived in the UK, and spent 16 years in the military?

Really?

I kind of think you are making shit up now.

And what the fuck is a "Gimpy"?

 

[peach174]

[
You are not including the second part of the sentence.

A well regulated Militia for the security of a free State (Security), the right of the people (all citizens of the U.S.A.) to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed(to violate or break).
We have the right to defend ourselves and prohibiting the sale of certain guns, infringes that right.

If it was meant only for the Militias it would say;
A well regulated Militia for the security of a free State, the right of the Militia to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
Instead it says PEOPLE not MILITIAS

It probably didn't think they needed to make a distinction.

Keep in mind, when the Founding Slave Rapists said "the People", they didn't mean Slaves, Women, Indians, or folks without property. They thought that all "Rights" would only be excercised by the privilaged few.

That is exactly why it says the People and not Militia. It is a very clear distinction.
Too many liberals think that they can add or take away what the Constitution says.
It says exactly what it means.
We fought the Revolutionary War because the citizens of America were ruled by the privileged few.
Rights were for all Americans.
Slaves were property and they were at war with the Indians. They were not considered U.S. Citizens.
You just made that up about people without property could not have guns.
It was because of our Constitution that eventually Slaves and Indians got their rights.

You have been schooled by liberals who hate the 2nd amendment.
It was and still is for every American Citizen.
That meant every Man, Woman and Child had the right and still has the right to own and fire a weapon.

 

[Montrovant]

[

Under current law they should not have had weapons. But no one in authority chose to use that authority to follow the law. So you would punish 300 million people because a couple people slip through the cracks. How enlightened of you..

Under current law, there are so many loopholes that are intentionally designed to allow people like that to have guns, and when someone tries to close them, the NRA comes down on them like a ton of bricks. You see, it's part of the marketting ploy.

The crazy gun whacks themselves don't make up a large enough market to really make a profit, but you let enough criminals and crazy people "slip through the cracks",and pretty soon, Nancy the Housewife suddenly thinks she needs 12 guns to protect herself. Until her crazy kid goes on a shooting spree.

[
As for your whine on rates of murder. 4 in 100,000 is a miniscule number, yet you would take away the right to self defense of 100's of millions cause you are a whiny little shit. Let me guess? In your utopia YOU would be allowed to be armed right?.

Naw, I wouldn't trust me with a gun. Soldiers and police would be armed. No one else really needs a gun.

I would take away the PRIVILAGE of owning a gun because most of you aren't responsible enough to handle it, and because self-defense is so rare that it hardly justified the carnage that results.

[
The law stands and your little rant does not change it. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right irregardless of status in a militia. Go cry somewhere else I am tired of explaining simple facts to a deranged paranoid fool. Seek help there are medications for your condition.

The law is only going to be around as long as the rest of us put up with it, and that won't be for much longer. History is against you, and every other industrialized country has already figured this out.

Don't most of those countries also use the metric system?

I think you underestimate the stubbornness of the US. If we can't even use the obviously superior metric system, why do you think we'll change in this instance because other countries have?

 

[JoeB131]

[

Don't most of those countries also use the metric system?

I think you underestimate the stubbornness of the US. If we can't even use the obviously superior metric system, why do you think we'll change in this instance because other countries have?

Eventually, we'll do both.

Incidently, most companies are ALREADY using the Metric System.

 

[JoeB131]

[

That is exactly why it says the People and not Militia. It is a very clear distinction.
Too many liberals think that they can add or take away what the Constitution says.
It says exactly what it means.
We fought the Revolutionary War because the citizens of America were ruled by the privileged few.
Rights were for all Americans.
Slaves were property and they were at war with the Indians. They were not considered U.S. Citizens.
You just made that up about people without property could not have guns.
It was because of our Constitution that eventually Slaves and Indians got their rights.

You have been schooled by liberals who hate the 2nd amendment.
It was and still is for every American Citizen.
That meant every Man, Woman and Child had the right and still has the right to own and fire a weapon.

I don't care if you show me apiece of paper signed by Thomas Jefferson that says, "Yeah, we really meant for Joker Holmes to have a gun!"

It's still a pretty stupid idea.

At the time of the founding, ONLY propertied white males had the right to vote. The Constitution was NOT an egalitarian document. It was designed to protect the privilages of the privilaged.