Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
OK...You've gone from ill-informed stooge to stone liar.Probably because there never has been a case where it happened successfully.
I know who Loughner is you pusillanimous poltroon.In fact, the case of Loughner (he's the bald one) one of the good samaritans who pinned him to the ground almost got shot by another good samaritan who rushed out with a gun but didn't know what was going on.
Fact is, if these two can get guns, guns are too readily available.
That they could get guns only proves that they could get guns....There's no law in the world that would prevent it.
The 2nd Amendment isn't about deer hunting or what you claim anyone else does or doesn't need, doofus.Why would a government want their citizens disarmed?
think about it
Assault weapons are used for "Assaults." Do hunters need clips with multiple rounds? No...and I am a hunter. The NRA needs to understand that there have got to be limits set.
OK...You've gone from ill-informed stooge to stone liar.Probably because there never has been a case where it happened successfully.
I know who Loughner is you pusillanimous poltroon.In fact, the case of Loughner (he's the bald one) one of the good samaritans who pinned him to the ground almost got shot by another good samaritan who rushed out with a gun but didn't know what was going on.
Fact is, if these two can get guns, guns are too readily available.
That they could get guns only proves that they could get guns....There's no law in the world that would prevent it.
Yet you never hear about these kinds of incidents in other industrialized countries. Or at least, very rarely. Hey, let's see how we compare to the other G-7 countries.
Murders with firearms statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime
# 4 United States: 9,369
# 11 Germany: 269
# 14 Canada: 144
# 28 Japan: 47
= 39 United Kingdom: 14
Didn't have figures for France or Italy... but I think you get the idea.
Quit parroting me, bigreb.
Tell us if there has ever been a ban?
Tell us the real characterization of Miller.
The 2nd Amendment isn't about deer hunting or what you claim anyone else does or doesn't need, doofus.Assault weapons are used for "Assaults." Do hunters need clips with multiple rounds? No...and I am a hunter. The NRA needs to understand that there have got to be limits set.
So what to 40, 50, or 100 shot ammunition clips have to do with the "right to bare arms?" How many pf those assault rifles and multiple ammunition clips were around when the 2nd Amendment was written? Go ahead...take your best shot!....multiple shots if you want!
What an astoundingly stupid statement. And one not supported by reality.No, dumbass -- Chicago has gun murders because criminals kill people with guns.
But typical leftist that you are, you can't seem to blame the murderers for their actions.
And if the criminals couldn't buy guns legally, they wouldn't be able to kill people.
If someone wants to kill someone else, they'll use what they can get.Oh, I guess they could use the pipe wrench or the rope or one of the boring weapons from Clue, but it would be a lot harder.
Tragic indeed. But people who want to kill themselves will kill themselves. The presence or absence of a gun has no bearing.Most gun deaths are suicides... but we have to protect their second amendment "rights".
I know straw man arguments and hyperbole make loons like you think you're making an argument, but you're not.The 2nd Amendment isn't about deer hunting or what you claim anyone else does or doesn't need, doofus.
Dianne Feinstein isn't moving to ban guns entirely either.
Would you feel "safer" driving a tank to the grocery store? Nuclear warhead anyone?
JimH52 is right. There has to be limits set.
If we need limits on anything, it's on the rank stupidity form the paranoid pinko whackaloons from the land of fruits and nuts.
Trying to use tanks and nukes as an argument to marginalize the 2nd Amendment is a total rejection of reason, moonbat.I know straw man arguments and hyperbole make loons like you think you're making an argument, but you're not.Dianne Feinstein isn't moving to ban guns entirely either.
Would you feel "safer" driving a tank to the grocery store? Nuclear warhead anyone?
JimH52 is right. There has to be limits set.
If we need limits on anything, it's on the rank stupidity form the paranoid pinko whackaloons from the land of fruits and nuts.
Gun wingnuts are as bad as those calling for an outright ban on guns entirely.
Both are blinded to reason.
I know straw man arguments and hyperbole make loons like you think you're making an argument, but you're not.Dianne Feinstein isn't moving to ban guns entirely either.
Would you feel "safer" driving a tank to the grocery store? Nuclear warhead anyone?
JimH52 is right. There has to be limits set.
If we need limits on anything, it's on the rank stupidity form the paranoid pinko whackaloons from the land of fruits and nuts.
Gun wingnuts are as bad as those calling for an outright ban on guns entirely.
Both are blinded to reason.
"Assault weapons" are too scary-looking for the irrational gun-haters. Maybe they'd prefer something more friendly:
]
I think you miss the point, Dave. If anyone lives in "fear", it's you.
Despite locking up 2 million scary minorities and poor people and having another 7 million on some for of parole or probation, you are just too scared someone is going to break into your house. So cowering in fear the mere penis substitute of a handgun just won't do it for you anymore.
You gotta have yourself a military grade weapon to feel "safer".
My Marlin .22 semi-auto with a 7-round magazine is hardly a military-grade weapon, you moron.
The 2nd Amendment was about a balance of power, not about muzzle loaders.The 2nd Amendment isn't about deer hunting or what you claim anyone else does or doesn't need, doofus.Assault weapons are used for "Assaults." Do hunters need clips with multiple rounds? No...and I am a hunter. The NRA needs to understand that there have got to be limits set.
So what to 40, 50, or 100 shot ammunition clips have to do with the "right to bare arms?" How many pf those assault rifles and multiple ammunition clips were around when the 2nd Amendment was written? Go ahead...take your best shot!....multiple shots if you want!
You don't need a factory to make a gun, dumbass.Wow...You really are naïve, aintcha?Manufacturing a gun is a lot harder than manufacturing drugs.
Cheaper Than Dirt - America's Ultimate Shooting Sports Discounter
All those guns were made at a factory. A factory that unlike a drug lab making ectasy, you need heavy machinary to produce.
Ending the manufacture of guns for the civilian market would be relatively easy.
Actually, they wouldn't even need to do that. Just get the gun manufacturers in a room, and tell them if they don't clean up their act, they can't bid on government contracts.
Then they'd make sure Joker Holmes wasn't buying guns on line.
And if the criminals couldn't buy guns legally, they wouldn't be able to kill people.
As if illegal drugs aren't easier to get on the street than the legal ones.
Manufacturing a gun is a lot harder than manufacturing drugs.
I know straw man arguments and hyperbole make loons like you think you're making an argument, but you're not.Dianne Feinstein isn't moving to ban guns entirely either.
Would you feel "safer" driving a tank to the grocery store? Nuclear warhead anyone?
JimH52 is right. There has to be limits set.
If we need limits on anything, it's on the rank stupidity form the paranoid pinko whackaloons from the land of fruits and nuts.
Gun wingnuts are as bad as those calling for an outright ban on guns entirely.
Both are blinded to reason.
We also have the world's most obese people...You want to ban all-you-can-eat buffets now?
Why are you fighting so hard for law-abiding citizens to be unable to defend themselves from those guys?I just have to ask...
Why are you guys fighting so hard for the right of THESE GUYS
to buy weapons that can kill dozens of people quickly.
I mean, not only aren't you capable of common sense, you think you'd have some sense of self-preservation.
You don't need a factory to make a gun, dumbass.Wow...You really are naïve, aintcha?
Cheaper Than Dirt - America's Ultimate Shooting Sports Discounter
All those guns were made at a factory. A factory that unlike a drug lab making ectasy, you need heavy machinary to produce.
Ending the manufacture of guns for the civilian market would be relatively easy.
Actually, they wouldn't even need to do that. Just get the gun manufacturers in a room, and tell them if they don't clean up their act, they can't bid on government contracts.
Then they'd make sure Joker Holmes wasn't buying guns on line.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDgHi_9_LX0]Skill: Making a Pipe Gun - YouTube[/ame]
I just showed you you can build a shotgun out of pipe.[
They sell all the components it takes to build weapons from the ground up.
Like I said, you're a totally naïve dilettante on the entire issue...Best STFU while you're behind.
I was in the army for 11 years, and my MOS was 76Y. I know more about weapons than you ever will.
Again, those components are made in factories. Regulate the factories, problem solved.
Yeah, like clamping down on drug trafficking is going to show any better results than it has to date.I dont disagree with most of gun control. I just think that liberals want to go about it the wrong way. First we got to lock down our boarders, put a serious halt to drug trafficking. I know that this is the hard part, but our effort is pretty limited as of now. We should also make a way to track ammunition, who buys it, how much, for what gun, what area do they live in (i.e. a city), how much did they use, when was it discharged, and was there a murder in their area. I am not saying limit ammunition, just to track it, like car accidents and violations. Its not going to end murder with firearms, but it will definitely limit it knowing you are probably going to get caught if you use a gun to kill someone.
