So this guy from Chicago, shows up at a Florida Convenience store showing the clerk he has a gun. Clerk shows robber his gun. Yeah for 2nd amend.

[hadit]

Um, yup, pretty much. 11 years of reading murder wank fantasies here from ammosexuals have convinced me of that. The way you guys cheered for Zimmerman and Rittenhouse for living your dream.

Oh, good grief, are you STILL claiming all that nonsense? You would think reality would have sunk in by now, but here we are.

But he went out and murdered an unarmed kid buying candy, and you guys made him into a national hero.

Hardly.

No, I don't expect the criminals to voluntarily turn in their firearms.
I expect their firearms to be confiscated and then they can't get new ones because the gun store that sells them one can be sued out of existence.

The Gun Industry has been flooding our streets with guns because they WANT people like you to be scared and want a gun, too.

Criminals generally don't buy guns at a gun store. Background checks, remember?

 

[JoeB131]

It is you who keeps equating race to criminality, and not anyone else whom you persist in falsely accusing of “racism”. It is you who, on the basis of your own racism, keeps insisting that any efforts to protect human beings from the predations of subhuman criminal shit are acting out of “racism”.

Not at all.

White people get probation
Black people get prison.

This is America... There's a reason why blacks make up 13% of the population and 38.4% of the prison population.

There currently are more firearms in our nation than people. People are smart enough to cache their weapons once confiscation begins. People have been burying firearms and ammo in PVC pipes ever since Handgun Control Inc. appeared on the scene. I remember reading instructions on how to do so back in the 1970s. You can even buy gun burial tubes on the internet today. Just do a Google search.

I'm not that worried about the gun nut who is burying his guns. Still gets those guns out of circulation.

We're well aware of the summer of riots. Many cities burned, people were injured and killed, and insurrectionist group took over several city blocks and declared themselves free of US dominion. We remember. You were just off by a year.

Only 50 deaths were linked to the BLM demonstrations... most of them cops killing protesters.

The murder rate shot up from 18,913 in 2019 to 24,576 in 2020. That had little to do with BLM riots and more that people who had tenuous relationships to start with were brought to a crisis point.

 

[JoeB131]

Well, yes. That pesky Constitution is a real impediment to the socialist / authoritarian desires of the left. The Party of Slavery, the Democrat Party, has become even more dangerous since their precious rights to oppress and intimidate have been stripped away.

Are you capable of rational thought, or do you just rant whatever you heard on Hate Radio like you had an original idea?

 

[JoeB131]

Criminals generally don't buy guns at a gun store. Background checks, remember?

Funny thing. Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.

Every. Fucking. Time.

 

[hadit]

Funny thing. Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.

Every. Fucking. Time.

Mental illness, yes they are very ill. That's not illegal though and doesn't show up on a background check.

Now, since you made the claim, it's on you to give us the cases where a shooter WITH a criminal record bought his guns at a gun shop and passed the background check. You said it happened every time, so you should have no problem finding them. Unless, of course, you're just making stuff up that sounds good. Not like it's the first time for that either.

 

[Hollie]

Are you capable of rational thought, or do you just rant whatever you heard on Hate Radio like you had an original idea?

That was a rather cowardly retreat.

 

[Hollie]

Funny thing. Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.

Every. Fucking. Time.

The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter stole a rifle from his parent.

Remarkable how ignorant and dishonest you are.


Every. Fucking. Time.

 

[Pellinore]

Irrelevant

For one many DGU's never get reported because a crime was stopped before it was committed therefore those crimes would never be counted anyway

Secondly it isn't any gun owners responsibility to protect the public and since SCOTUS has ruled that no police officer or police force has any legal obligation to come to the aid of the public it seems the cops aren't there to protect the public either.

Knowing that the police have no obligation to come to your aid the questions why don;t you own guns?

I have a gun for self defense not to protect the public. I'm not a cop, don;t want to be a cop.

Thank you for answering.

The problem with your argument is that "It keeps them from occurring" is the dictionary definition of "preventing."

Put it this way: Assuming defensive gun use prevents, say, a million incidents from becoming crimes, per year. (I'm making that number up, for illustration.) That means that if there was no defensive gun use, there would be one million more crimes on our books. That means that the presence of guns, of which we have a LOT, saves us one million crimes.

Which would be great, except that we already have higher crime rates, violent crime rates, firearm crime rates, and violent firearm crime rates than any other developed nation, by far. The "defensive gun use" argument is then saying that, if not for them, our crime rates would be *even higher*.

Why would our developed nation have crime rates be inexplicably in the stratosphere, if not for the most obvious and prominent difference between the US and every other nation—the gazillion guns?

 

[JoeB131]

Mental illness, yes they are very ill. That's not illegal though and doesn't show up on a background check.

Now, since you made the claim, it's on you to give us the cases where a shooter WITH a criminal record bought his guns at a gun shop and passed the background check. You said it happened every time, so you should have no problem finding them. Unless, of course, you're just making stuff up that sounds good. Not like it's the first time for that either.

Sure.

The DC Snipers.
The guy who shot up the factory in Aurora.

Obviously, you don't understand the concept of "or".

The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter stole a rifle from his parent.

Remarkable how ignorant and dishonest you are.

You mean the parent who took him to the range, let him play first person shooter games all day, and stockpiled enough guns to fight off the Zombie Apocalypse? Oh, yeah, and she was a batshit crazy prepper who believed she needed to stockpile guns and food for the coming end of the world.

 

[Hollie]

Sure.

The DC Snipers.
The guy who shot up the factory in Aurora.

Obviously, you don't understand the concept of "or".



You mean the parent who took him to the range, let him play first person shooter games all day, and stockpiled enough guns to fight off the Zombie Apocalypse? Oh, yeah, and she was a batshit crazy prepper who believed she needed to stockpile guns and food for the coming end of the world.

You mean the kid who never passed a background check which you insist "Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check''.

There are others, of course, but this is just another instance of your frantic claims being totally fraudulent and another instance of your failed attempt to sidestep your false claims.

 

[JoeB131]

You mean the kid who never passed a background check which you insist "Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check''.

There are others, of course, but this is just another instance of your frantic claims being totally fraudulent and another instance of your failed attempt to sidestep your false claims.

His mother never should have passed a background check because she was nuts... but she was still able to get enough guns to fight off the Zombies.
Unfortunately, the Zombie she should have been worried about was the one she lived with.

 

[Hollie]

His mother never should have passed a background check because she was nuts... but she was still able to get enough guns to fight off the Zombies.
Unfortunately, the Zombie she should have been worried about was the one she lived with.

View attachment 716846

You have no facts to support your nonsensical, "she was nuts", comment.

This is just another unsubstantiated, emotional outburst where you write hysterical claims with no basis in fact.

What's really nuts is watching your hysterical rants, void of anything demonstrable, being taken apart by facts but that doesn't slow you down with your dishonest diatribes.

 

[hadit]

Sure.

The DC Snipers.
The guy who shot up the factory in Aurora.

Obviously, you don't understand the concept of "or".

Oh, I clearly understand the concept of "or". I also understand the concept of guilt by association. Toss two unrelated things together, and if one is true, the other one is also assumed to be true.

Now, to brass tacks. What is your source that claims the DC snipers had felony arrests and passed a background check to buy their gun? The same for the Aurora shooter. Remember, if they don't have a conviction in their background, they're going to pass the check, thus nullifying your complaint. Your complain is only valid if these shooters passed the check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Now, to brass tacks. What is your source that claims the DC snipers had felony arrests and passed a background check to buy their gun? The same for the Aurora shooter. Remember, if they don't have a conviction in their background, they're going to pass the check, thus nullifying your complaint. Your complain is only valid if these shooters passed the check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.

You expect Joe to be honest!!!

 

[hadit]

You expect Joe to be honest!!!

No, I expect him to dance, dodge and dissemble, attempting to insult me as he does. Then I will drive home the fact that he's dishonest and doesn't have the integrity to admit what he's doing.

 

[Pellinore]

Funny thing. Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.

Every. Fucking. Time.

The 19-year-old who just shot up the high school in St. Louis tried to buy through a dealer, failed the background check, so he went and bought privately, with no problems at all.

Police: St. Louis shooter legally bought rifle from private seller after earlier sale blocked

The gunman who killed two people at a St. Louis high school earlier this week legally bought the rifle he used from a private seller after his earlier effort to purchase a firearm was blo…

thehill.com

(The Hill: Least Biased, Mostly Factual.)

 

[Blues Man]

Thank you for answering.

The problem with your argument is that "It keeps them from occurring" is the dictionary definition of "preventing."

Put it this way: Assuming defensive gun use prevents, say, a million incidents from becoming crimes, per year. (I'm making that number up, for illustration.) That means that if there was no defensive gun use, there would be one million more crimes on our books. That means that the presence of guns, of which we have a LOT, saves us one million crimes.

Which would be great, except that we already have higher crime rates, violent crime rates, firearm crime rates, and violent firearm crime rates than any other developed nation, by far. The "defensive gun use" argument is then saying that, if not for them, our crime rates would be *even higher*.

Why would our developed nation have crime rates be inexplicably in the stratosphere, if not for the most obvious and prominent difference between the US and every other nation—the gazillion guns?

It doesn't matter if civilian gun ownership reduces crime or not.

If you want to confine this to murder rates we can.

The murder rate in the UK today is about the same as it was in 1950 despite passing draconian gun laws in the 60's and subsequently banning civilians from owning hand guns and almost all centerfire rifle calibers.

The murder rate in the US today is about what it was in 1950 despite the institution of background checks, a 10 year assault weapons ban, the passing of literally thousands of gun laws and more people than ever not only owning firearms but also having concealed carry permits.

Gun laws do not equal lower murder rates.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The 19-year-old who just shot up the high school in St. Louis tried to buy through a dealer, failed the background check, so he went and bought privately, with no problems at all.

Thus, the fallacy of background checks.

 

[Pellinore]

Thus, the fallacy of background checks.

Except that, in this case, it *worked*. It prevented a person who had bad intent from buying a firearm. What didn't work is the private seller who happily sold him the gun he otherwise couldn't have gotten.

I am actually finding this case notable because it counters the common criticism of background checks that says they aim at the wrong target. I've seen a lot of people (here and elsewhere) say that few or none of these high-profile mass shootings would have been prevented by a background check, or by closing the so-called "gun show loophole." Well, here's one that would have.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Except that, in this case, it *worked*. It prevented a person who had bad intent from buying a firearm.

And yet, he shot up a school , so.... no.

What didn't work is the private seller who happily sold him the gun he otherwise couldn't have gotten.

Why do you think a law will prevent this?

or by closing the so-called "gun show loophole."

It is impossible to legally avoid the background checks specified by federal law - and thus, there is no loophole.