Sanders shifts on gun control

[g5000]

You forgot to put Islam in your cartoon.

Oopsie!



LIBTARD: Guns just killed some more people. We must ban them.

RUBE: Cars kill a lot more people than guns. So I guess we should ban them, too, right? Right? Right?

FOX NEWS: Some more Muslims just killed some more people. Every time any Muslim anywhere kills someone, we will be right here to tell you all about it, with doom music.

RUBE: WE MUST BAN MUSLIMS!!!

 

[Rustic]

 

[Rustic]

 

[Rustic]

 

[g5000]

Your arguments consisting of nothing but cartoons is proving my frequent point about rubes having the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.

Too bad for you the FACTS prove that countries which ban or heavily regulate gun ownership see their murder incidence plummet.

 

[Rustic]

Your arguments consisting of nothing but cartoons is proving my frequent point about rubes having the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.

Too bad for you the FACTS prove that countries which ban guns see their murder incidence plummet.

 

[g5000]

If gun manufacturing were banned, then it would make gun availability drop. Which would lead to a drop in gun homicides. Common sense. And the evidence bears this out in countries which have significantly restricted guns.

However, all of this would require a repeal of the Second Amendment, which is never going to happen. So these arguments over banning guns are specious.

 

[Rustic]

 

[g5000]

Your arguments consisting of nothing but cartoons is proving my frequent point about rubes having the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.

Too bad for you the FACTS prove that countries which ban guns see their murder incidence plummet.

And now the cartoon intellect is resorting to the Appeal to Emotion fallacy.

 

[g5000]

It takes a special kind of retard to think the gun homicide problem has something to do with a lack of guns in schools.

 

[Rustic]

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

OK but .... what's it got to do with "gun control"?

Presumably, if you can shut down gun makers you stop the legal supply. Libs use courts to do what they can't do with votes.

That's a specious speculation. Even your adverb is "presumably".

The point remains, the issue as stated isn't even about guns; it's about the legal process. "Gun control" would be something directly affecting the supply of --- guns. That's why I'm making the point that the title of this thread is misleadingly erroneous.

Sounds like this is roughly equivalent to holding a bartender responsible for continuing to serve a drunk that goes out and crashes into somebody. That exists now but it hasn't affected the lure of alcohol.

Gun manufacturer legislation wont affect guns?
Prior probability fallacy

Read my last paragraph -- did litigation against bars squash the practice of drinking?

OK then. Specious speculation. Or for short, "speeshulation". Your issue as presented doesn't affect guns, it affects the legal process. "Gun control" would be something that makes some kind of gun unavailable to some kind of buyer. This doesn't.

Bars have a liability for their conduct, not their customers and the liquor manufacturers are not liable for the conduct of the bar. So your comparison is pure BS.

Exactly! It would be like suing Maker's Mark when someone gets drunk and slams their own vehicle into a tree killing themselves.

 

[Rustic]

 

[Rustic]

 

[Rustic]

 

[Rustic]

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Your arguments consisting of nothing but cartoons is proving my frequent point about rubes having the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.

Too bad for you the FACTS prove that countries which ban or heavily regulate gun ownership see their murder incidence plummet.

They never had any guns to start with, and they don't have the 2nd Amendment, so your point falls flat on its face.

 

[The Rabbi]

Here's an idea. Poverty begets violence and other crimes.

Let's solve the poverty problem and everything else will fall into place.

More than 5 trillion on poverty in the last 50 years and we have as much of it as ever

Not true. Seniors are far better off economically than they were prior to 1964. And overall poverty is much lower.

Everyone is better off than they were in 1964, dumbshit. Its called rising GDP.
But seniors would have been far better off investing their own money for retirement rather than sinking it into the Ponzi scheme of SS.

 

[g5000]

Here's an idea. Poverty begets violence and other crimes.

Let's solve the poverty problem and everything else will fall into place.

More than 5 trillion on poverty in the last 50 years and we have as much of it as ever

Not true. Seniors are far better off economically than they were prior to 1964. And overall poverty is much lower.

Everyone is better off than they were in 1964, dumbshit. Its called rising GDP.

Oh my God. The innumeracy of this statement is simply mind-boggling.

 

[The Rabbi]

Gun prohibitions have vastly reduced the incidence of murder in those countries which have them.

So...try again.

Mere assertion fallacy.
Those countries never had high rates of crime to begin with. Mexico instituted stricter gun control and things got worse. Same with South Aftrica.