Right wingers...regarding Orlando tragedy....you have a tough choice to make

[Skull Pilot]

Well no one is as stupid as you as to compare a gun (a device designed to kill) with a hammer (a device designed to push a nail into a hard object). There were what, about 30,000 people in the U.S. last year who died by a gun. So tell me, rightwingnut.... how many people died by a hammer?

Why do you lie? The Biathlon is an Olympic sport. Are these guns designed to kill?

Guns are designed to kill. Deal with it. Just because some are not or because some shoot at targets; does not alter that fact. If guns weren't designed to kill, our military wouldn't use them in war.

Guns were designed to shoot pellets. Deal with it.

How a tool is used is determined by the user, not the tool. Deal with it.

Quit lying. It makes you look twisted and foolish.

Designed to kill...

... deal with it.

Actually all a firearm is designed to do is fire a projectile. What that projectile hits is the decision of the person holding the firearm.

 

[nat4900]

Actually all a firearm is designed to do is fire a projectile. What that projectile hits is the decision of the person holding the firearm.

......and napalm was designed to kill vegetation, the fact that people were amid that vegetation is NOT the fault of whomever dropped the napalm.....correct, nitwit?

 

[Divine Wind]

Just bought another thousand rounds for my noisemaker:

 

[Crixus]

See? Same play as all your other threads. Say your shit and run down a gopher hole. Would have said rabbit hole but that would imply that you were slick but your not. Europe has no bering here. Fuck'em.

Your argument would have more "bearing" if you could actually spell properly.

But to the point- Murder can be clearly quantified. Rape, not so much, if it isn't reported and isn't investigated.

Blah, blah, blah, I'm Joe derp you can't spell, I'm smart because unborn fetuses are medical waste, guns suck, Europe is better blase, blase. Rape ain't the issue derp. Murder with guns are. You asserted that Europe is a peaceful haven of love and harmony, yet if you look at murder with tools other then guns we run about neck and neck. Your infatuation with rape matters not except in your fetid little brain.

 

[Faun]

Well no one is as stupid as you as to compare a gun (a device designed to kill) with a hammer (a device designed to push a nail into a hard object). There were what, about 30,000 people in the U.S. last year who died by a gun. So tell me, rightwingnut.... how many people died by a hammer?

Why do you lie? The Biathlon is an Olympic sport. Are these guns designed to kill?

Guns are designed to kill. Deal with it. Just because some are not or because some shoot at targets; does not alter that fact. If guns weren't designed to kill, our military wouldn't use them in war.

Guns were designed to shoot pellets. Deal with it.

How a tool is used is determined by the user, not the tool. Deal with it.

Quit lying. It makes you look twisted, foolish and desperate.

When the sick, twisted liberals can't think of any reason to shoot a projectile through the air except to kill someone, it does make you think we need gun ownership by liberals restricted, doesn't it? Killers frequently give indications of their intent, I think we should take them seriously

Sadly, even kazzing doesn't help you. Guns are designed to kill. Did I say that's the only way they're used? Of course not. But their design is to kill. I'm sure to someone as stupid as you, you think we equip our military with arms not designed to kill. <smh>

 

[Faun]

Well no one is as stupid as you as to compare a gun (a device designed to kill) with a hammer (a device designed to push a nail into a hard object). There were what, about 30,000 people in the U.S. last year who died by a gun. So tell me, rightwingnut.... how many people died by a hammer?

Why do you lie? The Biathlon is an Olympic sport. Are these guns designed to kill?

Guns are designed to kill. Deal with it. Just because some are not or because some shoot at targets; does not alter that fact. If guns weren't designed to kill, our military wouldn't use them in war.

Guns were designed to shoot pellets. Deal with it.

How a tool is used is determined by the user, not the tool. Deal with it.

Quit lying. It makes you look twisted and foolish.

Designed to kill...

... deal with it.

You dodged my point and it's clear why you did. You also dodged the FBI statistics. Why?

Over 300 million guns in our country, yet only about 8,500 firearm murders per year, about 6,000 of those with handguns not "assault weapons".

The best way to reduce our national murder rate is to figure out why black males are murdering black males at a rate 8 times more than white males murdering white males.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf
Based on available data from 1980 to 2008—

 Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders. The victimization rate for blacks (27.8 per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000). The offending rate for blacks (34.4 per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000) (table 1).

 Males represented 77% of homicide victims and nearly 90% of offenders. The victimization rate for males (11.6 per 100,000) was 3 times higher than the rate for females (3.4 per 100,000). Th e off ending rate for males (15.1 per 100,000) was almost 9 times higher than the rate for females (1.7 per 100,000).

 Approximately a third (34%) of murder victims and almost half (49%) of the offenders were under age 25. For both victims and offenders, the rate per 100,000 peaked in the 18 to 24 year-old age group at 17.1 victims per 100,000 and 29.3 offenders per 100,000.

Sorry, but denial is not a point and statistics do not alter the design of guns.

 

[mgh80]

Right wingers.....especially on this forum......Your choice is both simple and a tough one to make.

Either you continue to adamantly support the sale of assault weapons to maniacs....weapons whose ONLY purpose is to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time...........OR

You employ some sanity and abandon this moronic notion that NO weapon should be outlawed so that you can "idealize' some stupid scenario that you must defend yourself from government troops......

If you have a conscience (and since most of you call yourselves "good Christians") you have a choice to make....Be tacitly complicit in mass murders....or change your attitude toward the sale of such lethal weapons,

I think it's disgusting that you're using this tragedy to attempt to play a game of "got you!" with posters on here.

And yes I did personally know one of the victims in Orlando (in the interest of being honesty I did not know him that well only met him a few times-however my wife was friends with him).

People here in Florida are devastated and we're uniting in our communities (I live in Tampa)...stop politicizing the issue.

 

[Faun]

Well no one is as stupid as you as to compare a gun (a device designed to kill) with a hammer (a device designed to push a nail into a hard object). There were what, about 30,000 people in the U.S. last year who died by a gun. So tell me, rightwingnut.... how many people died by a hammer?

Why do you lie? The Biathlon is an Olympic sport. Are these guns designed to kill?

Guns are designed to kill. Deal with it. Just because some are not or because some shoot at targets; does not alter that fact. If guns weren't designed to kill, our military wouldn't use them in war.

Guns were designed to shoot pellets. Deal with it.

How a tool is used is determined by the user, not the tool. Deal with it.

Quit lying. It makes you look twisted and foolish.

Designed to kill...

... deal with it.

Actually all a firearm is designed to do is fire a projectile. What that projectile hits is the decision of the person holding the firearm.

Remind me again ... what's the purpose of the Second Amendment?

 

[Divine Wind]

Remind me again ... what's the purpose of the Second Amendment?

To protect "We, the People" against tyranny. I'm not surprised you don't know this.

 

[Divine Wind]

Sorry, but denial is not a point and statistics do not alter the design of guns.

Agreed about denial. You should consider taking a good look at your own denial.

Ignoring statistics on guns is a stupid as those who ignore statistics on climate change or anything else. Do you really think an intelligent person uses emotion to accept some statistics and ignore others? No wonder most Americans are becoming Independents.

 

[Faun]

Remind me again ... what's the purpose of the Second Amendment?

To protect "We, the People" against tyranny. I'm not surprised you don't know this.

Who said I didn't know??

And to do what with those "arms" should tyranny threaten?

 

[Faun]

Sorry, but denial is not a point and statistics do not alter the design of guns.

Agreed about denial. You should consider taking a good look at your own denial.

Ignoring statistics on guns is a stupid as those who ignore statistics on climate change or anything else. Do you really think an intelligent person uses emotion to accept some statistics and ignore others? No wonder most Americans are becoming Independents.

Since statistics have nothing to do with the argument that guns are designed to kill, , I care not that you're trying to deflect by posting them.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Right wingers.....especially on this forum......Your choice is both simple and a tough one to make.

Either you continue to adamantly support the sale of assault weapons to maniacs....weapons whose ONLY purpose is to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time...........OR

You employ some sanity and abandon this moronic notion that NO weapon should be outlawed so that you can "idealize' some stupid scenario that you must defend yourself from government troops......

If you have a conscience (and since most of you call yourselves "good Christians") you have a choice to make....Be tacitly complicit in mass murders....or change your attitude toward the sale of such lethal weapons,

It wasn't assault weapons that took down the trade towers. You can't blame a firearm while ignoring the behavior trait of an extreme ideology of a group, a group who feels justificatied in their actions based on their extreme interpretation of their faith. This particular group will look at any means to carry out this view regardless if firearms were made illegal or not. For a government to accept the dangerous association surrounding a certain firearm in these mass shootings, is for politicians and an administration to publicly come forward and accept an extremist view of a religion exists to bring harm to those who don't share and conform to their view of religion. What we have here is the need to come down on the improper use of a firearm, while at the same time sugar coating the truth of an extremist view that exists behind the need to be more politically correct for a fear of "offending" someone or a particular religious group.

So which is more important here: the need to seriously address this common thread found among those behind all this senseless killings, or making sure we tone down our rhetoric so as to not offend anyone? Do we simply find it much easier to blame guns than to speak the truth behind those extremists who use them?

 

[Markle]

Please show us your source and link to your claim that Chicago "HASN'T HAD A FIREARMS BAN SINCE 2010. What do you consider Chicago not having an effective ban prior to that date.

The McDonald Decision struck down Chicago's gun ban.

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But even before McDonald, we had gun shops in the Suburbs that intentionally circumvented the g un laws. CPD found 20% of guns recovered in crimes came from one gun store in River forest.

Bottom line...you lied. Why not just admit you lied in an effort to paint a phony picture? Not a very good person are you?

 

[Markle]

Since statistics have nothing to do with the argument that guns are designed to kill, , I care not that you're trying to deflect by posting them.

Wow! You're a hoot. You no longer even try to conceal the FACT that statistics, accountability, measurable results, NONE of those things are relevant to the Far Left Progressive. They choose the easy way, all that matters is that whatever they do, LOOK AND FEEL GOOD. Results are irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant.

 

[sealybobo]

Since statistics have nothing to do with the argument that guns are designed to kill, , I care not that you're trying to deflect by posting them.

Wow! You're a hoot. You no longer even try to conceal the FACT that statistics, accountability, measurable results, NONE of those things are relevant to the Far Left Progressive. They choose the easy way, all that matters is that whatever they do, LOOK AND FEEL GOOD. Results are irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant.

Bullshit. Here is an example. Republicans are willing to pass a law that says no fly no buy. But there are 2 lists. The big list has 1 million names on the list. Republicans don't want to red flag the big list. Makes no sense. Anyone red flagged can follow due process and Sue to get their gun right back. If they win the government will pay their attorney fees.

I think anyone on a no fly should have to go to the cops before they can buy a gun.

And all private gun sales have to be registered with the cops.

These things will lower the number of attacks

 

[Faun]

Since statistics have nothing to do with the argument that guns are designed to kill, , I care not that you're trying to deflect by posting them.

Wow! You're a hoot. You no longer even try to conceal the FACT that statistics, accountability, measurable results, NONE of those things are relevant to the Far Left Progressive. They choose the easy way, all that matters is that whatever they do, LOOK AND FEEL GOOD. Results are irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant.

What do you think statistics have to do with the design of guns? Statistics reveal how people are using guns. They don't speak to the design.

 

[Markle]

They didn't circumvent gun laws asshole...when someone comes in with a clean record, and passes the federally mandated background check you can sell them the gun....twit.........the problem is that you morons think that criminals will just comply with whatever stupid law you pass, instead of going around them or just stealing their gun......

That's why you go after the gun sellers. You really think that gun store in River forest doesn't know who their clientele is?

Instead, why not try this stunning idea. Severely punish anyone convicted of using a gun in a crime.

In Florida, we have what is called our 10-20-Life gun law. Commit a crime while carrying a gun, automatic 10 years no parole. The gun doesn't have to leave the holster. Fire the gun, and it doesn't have to hit anyone, it can be a "warning shot" into the ceiling, minimum mandatory sentence 20 years no parole. Shoot someone, doesn't have to be a serious injury and bingo, you never see the light of day. Then, of course, we have the death penalty in Florida if intentionally kill someone, and it is used.,

Does Illinois have such a law? Or do they simply target law abiding citizens?

 

[Markle]

And yet, the violent crime rate is lower in the United States than in Australia. How is that possible?

"Banning" of certain guns will lead to fewer law abiding citizens having the guns and no change in the number of Islamic Terrorists and criminals having the guns. Sounds like a GREAT solution.

Not talking about violent crime. However, I do take issue with your stats. Post a link proving your point.

Talking gun deaths and gun culture. Every person I have ever met who has been punched in the head has lived to fight another day. Don't know anybody who has been shot in the head, but I'm guessing the vast majority end up on a slab...

Well, the US is armed to the teeth at the moment. A lot of those places where these mass shootings occur have CCW or even open carry. How well has that worked vis-a-vis the decline of mass shootings? Not much.

You're a hoot! To make your allegations work, you pretend that violent crimes, rape, assault, attempted murder, home invasions...don't count. That works for you and your morality? Really?

By the way, Pulse was a gun free zone. There was one armed guard outside the facility.

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.


Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.


The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.



Read more: Britain the most violent country in Europe and even worse than South Africa and U.S.

That is the biggest load of horseshit ever... I have lived in a number of those countries...

South Africa is very dangerous... Sweden is very safe... Netherland and Belgium are only the more high crime in Europe...

I posted facts, you posted your opinion.

QED

 

[Markle]

Since statistics have nothing to do with the argument that guns are designed to kill, , I care not that you're trying to deflect by posting them.

Wow! You're a hoot. You no longer even try to conceal the FACT that statistics, accountability, measurable results, NONE of those things are relevant to the Far Left Progressive. They choose the easy way, all that matters is that whatever they do, LOOK AND FEEL GOOD. Results are irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant.

What do you think statistics have to do with the design of guns? Statistics reveal how people are using guns. They don't speak to the design.

Wrong again my good friend.

Of course, statistics have a lot to do with the design of guns.

All five of these guns are essentially the same. Fire one round and the next is instantly ready the next time you pull the trigger. So you would ban them all? You don't have to answer, left up to you there would be a rounding up of guns not seen since Adolph Hitler.