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

[nat4900]

Simply place a government ban and there is no possible way you can fathom any individual might remotely be able to get a hold of something illegal.

Well, whether you know it or not....you just refuted your own argument with the above.....If the government had banned something, to get that something one would have to do something illegal.......not necessarily impossible to get that something, but the individual would have to be breaking a law.....which makes the chances of getting caught slightly more likely.

Conversely, NOT having the law, you have someone like Mateen purchasing a weapon of war wholly LEGAL, thereby considerably diminishing the chances of getting caught.

 

[JoeB131]

in absolute numbers fists are far more dangerous than scary black rifles

I'm surprised you aren't throwing in drownings... and all the other distractions you guys use to divert attention.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes I'm sure the left will say how successful tighter gun regulation laws will have on keeping those firearms away from those that intend to use them to kill others. After all, we can see how successful the government has already been in keeping drugs out of the hands of our youth, right? Simply place a government ban and there is no possible way you can fathom any individual might remotely be able to get a hold of something illegal.

This is why the government already has a poor track record of enforcement, by simply making it against the law for someone to obtain it. I often wonder what makes the liberals think that those wishing to inflict harm actually are able to do so WITHIN the confines of the law. Sorry Joe, contrary to belief law abiding and criminal are never associated together, as if to say Al Capone was an honest respectful businessman of integrity in our society.

again, guy, it isn't the "Criminal" whose the problem. It's the regular citizen who snaps or otherwise has a really bad day that I'm worried about, as they account for 90% of the gun deaths.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Simply place a government ban and there is no possible way you can fathom any individual might remotely be able to get a hold of something illegal.

Well, whether you know it or not....you just refuted your own argument with the above.....If the government had banned something, to get that something one would have to do something illegal.......not necessarily impossible to get that something, but the individual would have to be breaking a law.....which makes the chances of getting caught slightly more likely.

Conversely, NOT having the law, you have someone like Mateen purchasing a weapon of war wholly LEGAL, thereby considerably diminishing the chances of getting caught.

.... because likewise it has worked SO well in keeping our youth from getting a hold of drugs. Do you see how there is no evidense of government making something illegal has stopped those who are determined, from getting a hold of what they need? Interesting how individual states are having to "rethink" their strategy on this whole "government ban" on drugs under this simply making them illegal pursuit. Yet you believe gun control will somehow be different, and those seeking to get a hold of a particular firearm will never be able to find a way to attain one. How delusional does one have to be to believe criminal's will seek to work from within the confines of the law.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Yes I'm sure the left will say how successful tighter gun regulation laws will have on keeping those firearms away from those that intend to use them to kill others. After all, we can see how successful the government has already been in keeping drugs out of the hands of our youth, right? Simply place a government ban and there is no possible way you can fathom any individual might remotely be able to get a hold of something illegal.

This is why the government already has a poor track record of enforcement, by simply making it against the law for someone to obtain it. I often wonder what makes the liberals think that those wishing to inflict harm actually are able to do so WITHIN the confines of the law. Sorry Joe, contrary to belief law abiding and criminal are never associated together, as if to say Al Capone was an honest respectful businessman of integrity in our society.

again, guy, it isn't the "Criminal" whose the problem. It's the regular citizen who snaps or otherwise has a really bad day that I'm worried about, as they account for 90% of the gun deaths.

90% based on what particular detailed study?


Just looking at the two most recent public group killings San Bernadino and the one in Orlando, revealed a connection with the individual's need to excercize their extreme zealot interpretation of their Muslim faith. It's the embrace of this particular view of their religion that is the greater concern which... surprisingly .... no one from the left really wants to address or even acknowledge as a serious growing threat in our society (without those being labeled a racist for daring to recognize and confront its danger to our national security)

 

[Crixus]

The behavior view of the extremist behind the gun IS the real issue. Exactly what effect would gun laws have "specifically" in preventing a group of religious zealots from using commercial airliners to destroy the World Trade Center resulting in those thousands of lives being killed for their religious cause? Your pursuit of the tightest gun regulations will not stop a terrorist, nor keep guns out of their hands if they are determined in possessing them.

But here's the thing. After 9/11, we put scanners in the airports. We replaced minimum wage Rent-a-cops with a professional TSA. We put steel doors on the cockpits and air marshals on the flight. In short, after 9/11... WE DID SOMETHING.

And we haven't had another hijacking of an airliner in US Airspace since.

But we have gun massacre after gun massacre, and you guys insist up and down tighter gun laws won't do a thing, even though other countries have tight gun laws and rarely have these sorts of things happen.

Your hero's at TSA are zero for zero when it comes to preventing any crime whatsoever. But they are doing awesome at stealing shit. As for the hijackers, I'm thinking the feds dropped the ball there to. Maybe they was to busy recounting the recount. You have again failed to prove anything with your babble about other countries and their tight gun laws. You also can't account for your states inability to get the hood rats from shooting eachother as well as other people's kids and innocent bystanders with its tight gun laws. Murders stil, happen and shootings still happen. If you like the motherland so much go back. I can recommend some cheap places. Just wouldn't recommend you go for walks at night or park your car anywhere but under a street light.

 

[OKTexas]

Really, when was he convicted of terrorism? He was investigated by the FBI, they said there was no there there, so in reality a law abiding citizen bought weapons, after passing at least 4 background checks and 2 FBI investigations, I might add.

Let me ask you a simple question that even you might understand. If we start screwing over citizens, taking away their rights, while violating our laws and Constitution in the process, who wins? Us or the terrorist?

You're worried about 50 people, what about the thousands upon thousands that died to preserve our rights, are you going to shit on them and hand the terrorist a victory just because you're afraid? Your odds of dying from a fall are hundreds of times greater than dying in a terrorist attack. Now crawl back under your bed, I'm sure your daddy will protect you.

Well you make a good case.....but you're omitting TWO important side issues....

First, Orlando may or may not be a terrorist issue so that your bolded section above is not altogether valid. Aurora and Sandy Hook are two cases that were not related to Islamic fanatics.

Second. with EVERY one of our rights there are substantial responsibilities......Almost all of our bill of rights have had case law to point out that the right has also limits when living in a society....However, you nutcases don't even want to entertain some curbing of the 2ns amendment (probably because the NRA and its partial funding entity...the gun manufacturers.......scare the shit out of republican (and some democrat) elected dingbat that they'll be ousted if ANY curbing of gun sales is promoted......essentially "legal" EXTORTION.)

NO ONE wants to take away gun rights......What we DO want is for weapons of war to NOT be sold to whomever wants one and has the money to get one......

Yes, the FBI may have fucked up with Mateen but you right wingers made it very easy to amass the weapons for him to do the carnage.

Ok, you seem to want to have a reasonable conversation. So let's do it a couple of points at a time.

1. Now, by the standards of our judicial system, EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. right? Since we will never get the Orlando shooter, I refuse to use his name, in a court. Would you agree he was an innocent man right to the point where he broke FL law and brought weapons into the night club?

2. I won't apologize for myself, because that all I speak for, for not wanting any of the bill of rights watered down. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution including the bill of right at least 9 times, and unlike some, I take that oath very seriously. Our bill of rights separate us from every other country in the world, so I won't agree to watering down any of them. Whats the next one you folks want to water down, due process, your right to a trial by a jury of your peers, the right to confront your accusers, oh wait, the feds are already denying citizens all of those with their secret no fly list, aren't they?

I'll wait for your answers and what points you would like to discuss.

 

[OKTexas]

I can make a bomb out of stuff at the hardware store, no background check required. Damn you're stupid.

And you probably need to look up how to do it. Which may alert the FBI. You also might just blow your stupid self up. Or the bomb won't go off cause you messed up. Most importantly, making bombs is illegal. You choose to legally well arm killers.

Most importantly, making bombs is illegal.

You still not grasping the subject matter here, are ya? Killing people is also "illegal", seems terrorist and criminals just don't seem to care much about the law. Evidently you regressive are no better than terrorist and criminals, you have no problem denying citizens 4 primary constitutional rights. So take your tyrannical BS and shove it, you just became a terrorist.

And you choose to make it as easy as possible to buy weapons for mass killing. The terrorists love republicans.

Hey dumb ass, if they're terrorist, take them to court, convict them and they lose their right to buy guns. See how simple it is? It's also how the Constitution says you have to do it, and short of that, the Constitution says they keep all their rights, including their right to fly.

Hey dumbass. The terrorist legally bought his weapons of mass killing and slaughtered 49 and injured over 50. Terrorists thank republicans.

Knock, knock, he wasn't a terrorist, the FBI said so. Next.

 

[OKTexas]

all the time right.

less than 1% of all murders happen in mass shootings and fists kill more people than all rifles combined every year

If you can show me where someone slaughtered 49 people with their fists, you might be on to something.

Tell me how a fist can stop a mass shooter in progress?

Actually rather simply, there were 300 people in that club, they could have taken him down with limited causalities. There damn sure wouldn't have been more than a hundred shot. But that take a bit of will and training, something our fine government has no interest in, they'd rather take away the rights of law abiding citizens.

 

[OKTexas]

Not all of those shooters got their guns legally.

Perhaps from their absent-minded parents....Nonetheless, some DID get the guns perfectly legal.

Yeah, the sandy hook shooters mother was absent of mind, he blew her brains out.

 

[nat4900]

Really, when was he convicted of terrorism? He was investigated by the FBI, they said there was no there there, so in reality a law abiding citizen bought weapons, after passing at least 4 background checks and 2 FBI investigations, I might add.

Let me ask you a simple question that even you might understand. If we start screwing over citizens, taking away their rights, while violating our laws and Constitution in the process, who wins? Us or the terrorist?

You're worried about 50 people, what about the thousands upon thousands that died to preserve our rights, are you going to shit on them and hand the terrorist a victory just because you're afraid? Your odds of dying from a fall are hundreds of times greater than dying in a terrorist attack. Now crawl back under your bed, I'm sure your daddy will protect you.

Well you make a good case.....but you're omitting TWO important side issues....

First, Orlando may or may not be a terrorist issue so that your bolded section above is not altogether valid. Aurora and Sandy Hook are two cases that were not related to Islamic fanatics.

Second. with EVERY one of our rights there are substantial responsibilities......Almost all of our bill of rights have had case law to point out that the right has also limits when living in a society....However, you nutcases don't even want to entertain some curbing of the 2ns amendment (probably because the NRA and its partial funding entity...the gun manufacturers.......scare the shit out of republican (and some democrat) elected dingbat that they'll be ousted if ANY curbing of gun sales is promoted......essentially "legal" EXTORTION.)

NO ONE wants to take away gun rights......What we DO want is for weapons of war to NOT be sold to whomever wants one and has the money to get one......

Yes, the FBI may have fucked up with Mateen but you right wingers made it very easy to amass the weapons for him to do the carnage.

Ok, you seem to want to have a reasonable conversation. So let's do it a couple of points at a time.

1. Now, by the standards of our judicial system, EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. right? Since we will never get the Orlando shooter, I refuse to use his name, in a court. Would you agree he was an innocent man right to the point where he broke FL law and brought weapons into the night club?

2. I won't apologize for myself, because that all I speak for, for not wanting any of the bill of rights watered down. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution including the bill of right at least 9 times, and unlike some, I take that oath very seriously. Our bill of rights separate us from every other country in the world, so I won't agree to watering down any of them. Whats the next one you folks want to water down, due process, your right to a trial by a jury of your peers, the right to confront your accusers, oh wait, the feds are already denying citizens all of those with their secret no fly list, aren't they?

I'll wait for your answers and what points you would like to discuss.

On your first point, be aware that NONE of the shooters in mass murders (Aurora, Sandy Hook, etc.) had PREVIOUSLY been convicted of murder.........Sometime I wonder how a person is called an honest citizen on a Monday...and than a mass murderer on Tuesday.

On your second point, we HAVE watered down many of the bill o rights.....The first and eight (torture) come quickly to mind.

Again NO ONE is stating to take ways your precious gun rights......Its the weapons of war we do not want in ANYONE's hands since they can turn from "honest citizen" on a day and "terrorist/murderer" the next.

 

[OKTexas]

Yes I'm sure the left will say how successful tighter gun regulation laws will have on keeping those firearms away from those that intend to use them to kill others. After all, we can see how successful the government has already been in keeping drugs out of the hands of our youth, right? Simply place a government ban and there is no possible way you can fathom any individual might remotely be able to get a hold of something illegal.

This is why the government already has a poor track record of enforcement, by simply making it against the law for someone to obtain it. I often wonder what makes the liberals think that those wishing to inflict harm actually are able to do so WITHIN the confines of the law. Sorry Joe, contrary to belief law abiding and criminal are never associated together, as if to say Al Capone was an honest respectful businessman of integrity in our society.

again, guy, it isn't the "Criminal" whose the problem. It's the regular citizen who snaps or otherwise has a really bad day that I'm worried about, as they account for 90% of the gun deaths.

Provide a link for that claim please.

 

[emilynghiem]

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,

Dear nat4900 many doctors have made or confirmed the discovery that Christian healing prayer has cured ppl of mental physical and even criminal illness in order to save lives.

So if the liberal left rejects Christianity, censors this information, and prevents mentally and criminally dangerous ppl from getting help, does that make the left Complicit in allowing sick ppl to endanger the public and kill people?

Not just mass shooters, but rapists, serial criminals, drunk drivers, stalkers and sexual predators -- all these abusive and addictive ills can be prevented corrected or reduced. If the cure comes from Christian healing practice, and the left rejects that and obstructs the cure does that make you Complicit ?

 

[Markle]

Hey genius....they have fucking air marshals with guns ....twit.

40 states allow people to carry guns into places that serve alcohol twit....and Virginia passed concealed carry in bars.....and their bar crime rate dropped 5.9%....nothing you believe about guns is true, and nothing you believe about gun owners is true........you just talk out of your ass.....

You mean guys who are specifically trained in firearm use.

Here's the thing. Yes, state laws "allow it". Illinois allows it. And individual bar owners post signs like this

On their doors because they don't want you to whip out your Penis compensator after a few drinks makes you feel froggy.

Here's one for your house.

 

[OKTexas]

Really, when was he convicted of terrorism? He was investigated by the FBI, they said there was no there there, so in reality a law abiding citizen bought weapons, after passing at least 4 background checks and 2 FBI investigations, I might add.

Let me ask you a simple question that even you might understand. If we start screwing over citizens, taking away their rights, while violating our laws and Constitution in the process, who wins? Us or the terrorist?

You're worried about 50 people, what about the thousands upon thousands that died to preserve our rights, are you going to shit on them and hand the terrorist a victory just because you're afraid? Your odds of dying from a fall are hundreds of times greater than dying in a terrorist attack. Now crawl back under your bed, I'm sure your daddy will protect you.

Well you make a good case.....but you're omitting TWO important side issues....

First, Orlando may or may not be a terrorist issue so that your bolded section above is not altogether valid. Aurora and Sandy Hook are two cases that were not related to Islamic fanatics.

Second. with EVERY one of our rights there are substantial responsibilities......Almost all of our bill of rights have had case law to point out that the right has also limits when living in a society....However, you nutcases don't even want to entertain some curbing of the 2ns amendment (probably because the NRA and its partial funding entity...the gun manufacturers.......scare the shit out of republican (and some democrat) elected dingbat that they'll be ousted if ANY curbing of gun sales is promoted......essentially "legal" EXTORTION.)

NO ONE wants to take away gun rights......What we DO want is for weapons of war to NOT be sold to whomever wants one and has the money to get one......

Yes, the FBI may have fucked up with Mateen but you right wingers made it very easy to amass the weapons for him to do the carnage.

Ok, you seem to want to have a reasonable conversation. So let's do it a couple of points at a time.

1. Now, by the standards of our judicial system, EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. right? Since we will never get the Orlando shooter, I refuse to use his name, in a court. Would you agree he was an innocent man right to the point where he broke FL law and brought weapons into the night club?

2. I won't apologize for myself, because that all I speak for, for not wanting any of the bill of rights watered down. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution including the bill of right at least 9 times, and unlike some, I take that oath very seriously. Our bill of rights separate us from every other country in the world, so I won't agree to watering down any of them. Whats the next one you folks want to water down, due process, your right to a trial by a jury of your peers, the right to confront your accusers, oh wait, the feds are already denying citizens all of those with their secret no fly list, aren't they?

I'll wait for your answers and what points you would like to discuss.

On your first point, be aware that NONE of the shooters in mass murders (Aurora, Sandy Hook, etc.) had PREVIOUSLY been convicted of murder.........Sometime I wonder how a person is called an honest citizen on a Monday...and than a mass murderer on Tuesday.

On your second point, we HAVE watered down many of the bill o rights.....The first and eight (torture) come quickly to mind.

Again NO ONE is stating to take ways your precious gun rights......Its the weapons of war we do not want in ANYONE's hands since they can turn from "honest citizen" on a day and "terrorist/murderer" the next.

If we knew the answer to your first point one of us would be rich, wouldn't we?

I showed you where the 5th and 6th amendments are being denied by these secret watch list, but please elaborate on the 1st and 8th.

As far as gun rights go, what you might consider adequate for your situation, may not be adequate for mine. I'll bet you live in the city where coming into contact with harmful or dangerous animals is rare, am I right? I on the other hand live in a rural area, I don't own an AR15 right now, but I'm seriously considering buying one with a night vision scope. I'm going to post a couple of pictures and I'll explain them.

The first image is part of my front yard and the surrounding woods, pardon my trash trailer, it 300 feet to the road and I use it to take the trash out. The other 2 are photos of damage wild hogs have done to area I normally mow. They are ruts as much as 8" deep and they torn up almost an acre of ground. That's just at my place, all my neighbors have the same problem. One neighbor caught 15 of them in one frame on a game camera. The only way to deal with these destructive pest is to kill them. An AR15 is an ideal tool for the job. So your top down, one size fits all policy is considered lunacy in my part of the country, I won't apologize for that.

 

[Markle]

Yes, that's what happens when you go to war. The enemy actually fights back. I know, it's amazing that you guys are so clueless on this.

still not a good reason to let anyone buy a gun.

I don't have a reason for to buy or own a gun other than for my own and my families protection.

Moreover, I have no NEED for a reason since I have A RIGHT to own a gun.

 

[Markle]

Because I don't trust you. I don't know that one day you might come home all pissed off and decide to go postal. Why should my freedoms and rights be held hostage by people (the vast majority who are men) who get a big hard-on when they hold their peashooter in their hands.

I note you will be the third person in this thread alone who I've asked to prove how more freer you are than me. I reiterate I've got more freedoms than you'll ever have.

That's a number of times you've commented on "Little Dr Grump". Hmmmmm....

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Markle]

Hey dumb ass, if they're terrorist, take them to court, convict them and they lose their right to buy guns. See how simple it is? It's also how the Constitution says you have to do it, and short of that, the Constitution says they keep all their rights, including their right to fly.

Yes, they are terrorists. They did not rob a liquor store or assault a bouncer.

This was an ACT OF WAR. They have declared a Fatwa against the united States. Just as Osama bin Laden did before the second 9/11/2001 act of war. These are acts of war against our country by enemy combatants, NOT CRIMINALS.

Specifically why do you think they are NOT at war with our country?

 

[Vigilante]