Thank God for our RIGHT to keep and bear arms

[Wry Catcher]

Go to range and learn gun. Check.
Go to apartment and put gun in bedside table. Check.
Go to party at college with girlfriend. Check.
Drink too much with guy I really like. Check.
Pass out and get raped by same guy. Check.

Yeah, the gun was a big fucking help.

Yeah and ever rape involves a drunk girl right?

No, but that happens often enough. Just another example of where a gun wouldn't help.

and what about the times it doesn't happen that way and a woman could defend herself?

But you don't give a shit about that woman right?

I think the exception proves the rule in this case.

If one person saves his own life by carrying a gun than that's good enough for me

Really? So Jesse James, Jr. heads into the bank to steal the bank's assets and kills the armed guard, you're OK with that?

You're too dumb to have any discussions on the issue of gun control.

No....you are the stupid one....not one thing you say about guns in this country is accurate or true.......your side of the discussion makes up crap....and denies the truth when actual statistics from the CDC and the FBI show how wrong you are.....

Thank you so much for offering your opinion; unfortunately your opinion(s) are foolish and not based on facts or reality.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You're too dumb to have any discussions on the issue of gun control.

Unfortunately WC, you're too dumb to understand that the American people (not you little liberals - I'm talking real Americans) don't tolerate "control". And we sure as hell do not negotiate our rights - especially the one right that ensures all of the other rights.

The U.S. Constitution never promised security. It promised liberty. If that's too scary for you, then I suggest you relocate to one of the many socialist nations in which the authoritarian regimes disarmed the people. You should feel niiiiiiiice and "safe" there.

I feel nice and safe; I never need to look under our bed before going to sleep, or making sure my gun is locked and loaded and secure in my pocket when I take out the garbage at night, or go to the mall or safeway shopping. Do you?

 

[P@triot]

Ohhhhh Caaaaandy.....

 

[P@triot]

You're too dumb to have any discussions on the issue of gun control.

Unfortunately WC, you're too dumb to understand that the American people (not you little liberals - I'm talking real Americans) don't tolerate "control". And we sure as hell do not negotiate our rights - especially the one right that ensures all of the other rights.

The U.S. Constitution never promised security. It promised liberty. If that's too scary for you, then I suggest you relocate to one of the many socialist nations in which the authoritarian regimes disarmed the people. You should feel niiiiiiiice and "safe" there.

I feel nice and safe; I never need to look under our bed before going to sleep, or making sure my gun is locked and loaded and secure in my pocket when I take out the garbage at night, or go to the mall or safeway shopping. Do you?

You clearly don't. If you felt safe, you wouldn't keep talking about banning guns because of "gun violence".

 

[P@triot]

Ohhhhh Caaaaandy..... a man who accomplished more in 24 hours than you have in 48 years, and who helped found the country and design the U.S. Constitution said "people" and not "militia".

 

[candycorn]

So the police officer who enforces the speed limit is upholding the US Constitution? Oh okay.

Uh....yeah. They certainly aren't violating the Constitution by enforcing the speed limit. You get more bizarre with each post as you get more desperate.

View attachment 74442

Interesting…what part of the constitution addresses speed limits specifically.

 

[candycorn]

Australia has tough gun laws.
They have very few gun deaths.

We have tons of guns.
We have tons of gun deaths.

Coincidence? No.

 

[candycorn]

Ohhhhh Caaaaandy.....

View attachment 74447

That is because most men are conscripted into the military and have the weapon as part of their service. Afterword…here are the restrictions according to Wikipedia:

Buying guns[edit]
In order to purchase most weapons, the purchaser must obtain a weapon acquisition permit (Art. 8 WG). Swiss citizens over the age of 18 who are not psychiatrically disqualified nor identified as posing security problems, and who have a clean criminal record can request such a permit. Foreigners with the following citizenship are explicitly excluded from the right to possess weapons: Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Algeria and Albania (Art. 12, WV). The following information must be provided to the cantonal weapon bureau together with the weapon application form:

• valid official identification or passport copy
• residence address
• criminal record copy not older than 3 months

For each transfer of a weapon or an essential weapon component without weapons acquisition permit (Art. 10 WG), a written contract must be concluded. Each Party shall keep them at least ten years. The contract must include the following information (Art. 11 WG):

• Family name, first name, birth date, residence address and signature of the person who sells the weapon or essential weapon component
• Family name, first name, birth date, residence address and signature of the person who purchases the weapon or an essential weapon component
• Kind of weapon, manufacturer or producer, label, caliber, weapon number, and date and place of transfer;
• Type and number of official identification of the person who acquires the weapon or the essential weapon component
• and an indication of the processing of personal data in connection with the contract in accordance with the privacy policy of the Federation or the cantons, if firearms are transmitted.

This information must be sent within 30 days to the cantonal weapon registration bureau, where the weapon holders are registered (Art. 9 WG).

Some weapons do not need a weapon acquisition permit (Art. 10 WG):

• Single-shot and multi-barreled hunting rifles and replicas of single-shot muzzle
• By the Federal Council designated hand bolt-action rifles, which are commonly used in off-duty and sporting gunnery recognized by the military law of 3 February 1952 and shooting clubs for hunting purposes in Switzerland
• Single-shot rabbit slayer;
• Compressed air and CO2 weapons that develop a muzzle energy of at least 7.5 joules, or may be confused because of their appearance with real firearms

Buying Ammunition[edit]

Ready ammunition of the Swiss Army. Soldiers equipped with the Sig 550 assault rifle used to be issued 50 rounds of ammunition in a sealed can, to be opened only upon alert and for use while en route to join their unit. This practice was stopped in 2007.[10]
In order to purchase ammunition the buyer must follow the same legal rules that apply to buying guns. The buyer can only buy munition for guns that he/she legally owns and must provide the following information to the seller (Art. 15, 16 WG; Art 24 WV):[8][9]

• valid official identification or passport (and must be older than 18 and who are not psychiatrically disqualified nor identified as posing security problems, and must not be a citizen of the following countries (Art. 12 WV): Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Algeria and Albania)
• residence address
• criminal record copy not older than 3 months
• weapon acquisition permit not older than 2 years, or a weapon carrying permit not older than 5 years

This also applies for weapons which do not require a weapon acquisition permit (see above, excluding the weapon acquisition permit, of course).

This information must be sent within 30 days to the cantonal weapon registration bureau, where the weapon holder is registered.

The same applies to black powder and modern black powder substitutes for use in firing historical rifles.


A Swiss 100 gram black powder container.
The possession of the following munition is generally prohibited:

• Ammunition with armor-piercing bullets
• Ammunition with projectiles containing an explosive or incendiary device
• Ammunition with one or more floors to the release of substances which damage the health of people in the long run
• Ammunition, missiles and missile launchers for military explosive
• Ammunition with projectiles for transmitting electric shocks
• Ammunition for handguns with deformation effect

Carrying guns[edit]
To carry a loaded firearm in public or outdoors (and for an individual who is a member of the militia carrying a firearm other than his Army-issue personal weapons off-duty), a person must have a Waffentragbewilligung (gun carrying permit), which in most cases is issued only to private citizens working in occupations such as security.[8] It is, however, quite common to see a person serving military service to be en route with his rifle, albeit unloaded.[11]

Are you willing to implement the same rules here?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Australia has tough gun laws.
They have very few gun deaths.

We have tons of guns.
We have tons of gun deaths.

Coincidence? No.

So is that because of guns or something else?

If you look at the chart (ask if you can't find it) you will see that Australia had just as many gun deaths and murders before the gun ban as after. One change that did take place is that rapes in Australia went up 50% after the ban was put into place (scroll back to my earlier post 647 with the charts.)

True, if you have more guns, you will have more gun deaths, just like if you have more knives, you will have more knife deaths, and if you have more cars on the road, you will have more vehicle deaths.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And it's really easy to take your wife and daughters to the range and practice. It can actually be a lot of fun. It can be done, and is being done. I see it all the time these days.

Help them become comfortable and confident with the firearms. It's very important, because you don't want a terrible incident to be the first time they handle the firearms. You want them to be proficient by then. So, get out and shoot. It's fun. Enjoy.

Go to range and learn gun. Check.
Go to apartment and put gun in bedside table. Check.
Go to party at college with girlfriend. Check.
Drink too much with guy I really like. Check.
Pass out and get raped by same guy. Check.

Yeah, the gun was a big fucking help.

Yeah and ever rape involves a drunk girl right?

No, but that happens often enough. Just another example of where a gun wouldn't help.

and what about the times it doesn't happen that way and a woman could defend herself?

But you don't give a shit about that woman right?

I think the exception proves the rule in this case.

If one person saves his own life by carrying a gun than that's good enough for me

Really? So Jesse James, Jr. heads into the bank to steal the bank's assets and kills the armed guard, you're OK with that?

You're too dumb to have any discussions on the issue of gun control.

I use the ATM and what's that got to do with the post I answered about rape?

Besides using criminals who won't follow gun control laws as a justification for restricting law abiding citizens from having guns is naive to the point of mental retardation

 

[P@triot]

Are you willing to implement the same rules here?

I don't have to. The U.S. Constitution guarantees my rights without any concessions on my behalf.

 

[P@triot]

Are you willing to implement the same rules here?

Kudos on your cut & paste. It doesn't change the fact that they have the highest gun ownership in the world (nearly 1 out of two people) - exceeding the U.S. And they have a lower crime rate. If liberals would stop banning firearms in Chicago, New York, D.C., etc. - we would do. The blood is on your hands Corny. Somehow, I don't think you really care though.

 

[P@triot]

So the police officer who enforces the speed limit is upholding the US Constitution? Oh okay.

Uh....yeah. They certainly aren't violating the Constitution by enforcing the speed limit. You get more bizarre with each post as you get more desperate.

View attachment 74442

Interesting…what part of the constitution addresses speed limits specifically.

The 10th Amendment. It states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people". The states are fully within their rights to create speed limits. The federal government would not be.

You know - if you're going to discuss this so often - why not just read the document? It doesn't take that long. Only liberals create 2,000+ page nonsense like Obamacare. Our limited government conservative founders created an entire nation and structure of government on about 3 pages. Certainly you can handle three pages, can't you?

 

[candycorn]

Australia has tough gun laws.
They have very few gun deaths.

We have tons of guns.
We have tons of gun deaths.

Coincidence? No.

So is that because of guns or something else?

If you look at the chart (ask if you can't find it) you will see that Australia had just as many gun deaths and murders before the gun ban as after. One change that did take place is that rapes in Australia went up 50% after the ban was put into place (scroll back to my earlier post 647 with the charts.)

True, if you have more guns, you will have more gun deaths, just like if you have more knives, you will have more knife deaths, and if you have more cars on the road, you will have more vehicle deaths.

Sure they did. NOT!!!

 

[candycorn]

So the police officer who enforces the speed limit is upholding the US Constitution? Oh okay.

Uh....yeah. They certainly aren't violating the Constitution by enforcing the speed limit. You get more bizarre with each post as you get more desperate.

View attachment 74442

Interesting…what part of the constitution addresses speed limits specifically.

The 10th Amendment. It states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people". The states are fully within their rights to create speed limits. The federal government would not be.

You know - if you're going to discuss this so often - why not just read the document? It doesn't take that long. Only liberals create 2,000+ page nonsense like Obamacare. Our limited government conservative founders created an entire nation and structure of government on about 3 pages. Certainly you can handle three pages, can't you?

So in other words…you cannot.

Thanks.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You're too dumb to have any discussions on the issue of gun control.

Unfortunately WC, you're too dumb to understand that the American people (not you little liberals - I'm talking real Americans) don't tolerate "control". And we sure as hell do not negotiate our rights - especially the one right that ensures all of the other rights.

The U.S. Constitution never promised security. It promised liberty. If that's too scary for you, then I suggest you relocate to one of the many socialist nations in which the authoritarian regimes disarmed the people. You should feel niiiiiiiice and "safe" there.

I feel nice and safe; I never need to look under our bed before going to sleep, or making sure my gun is locked and loaded and secure in my pocket when I take out the garbage at night, or go to the mall or safeway shopping. Do you?

You clearly don't. If you felt safe, you wouldn't keep talking about banning guns because of "gun violence".

1. I have never suggested, hinted at, written or said anything that any honest person could prove I support banning guns. Thus, Rottweiler is a damn liar.

2. I have empathy, for the parents and loved ones of those murdered by guns; callous conservatives care only about their right to have a gun.

3. Anyone who needs to carry a gun all of the time out of fear is at best neurotic, and more likely out of touch with reality.

4. The Preamble is a vision statement, one which promises much more than liberty, to wit:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

These words ordain (decree) all of the above goals highlighted, not just liberty.

 

[candycorn]

Are you willing to implement the same rules here?

Kudos on your cut & paste. It doesn't change the fact that they have the highest gun ownership in the world (nearly 1 out of two people) - exceeding the U.S. And they have a lower crime rate. If liberals would stop banning firearms in Chicago, New York, D.C., etc. - we would do. The blood is on your hands Corny. Somehow, I don't think you really care though.

Got your dancing shoes on early today…..

That is what a “well regulated militia” looks like and what-do-you-know…very few gun deaths because whack jobs like you that think they should be able to buy landmines are laughed out of the room.

Thanks for proving my point better than I ever could have.

 

[P@triot]

Australia has tough gun laws.
They have very few gun deaths.

We have tons of guns.
We have tons of gun deaths.

Coincidence? No.

So is that because of guns or something else?

If you look at the chart (ask if you can't find it) you will see that Australia had just as many gun deaths and murders before the gun ban as after. One change that did take place is that rapes in Australia went up 50% after the ban was put into place (scroll back to my earlier post 647 with the charts.)

True, if you have more guns, you will have more gun deaths, just like if you have more knives, you will have more knife deaths, and if you have more cars on the road, you will have more vehicle deaths.

You have to realize - liberals don't care the people die. They just want to ban an inanimate object that they were conditioned to have an irrational fear of.

More people die every single year in automobiles than by firearms - yet every liberal is happy to ride in a vehicle and none of them call to ban automobiles.

 

[candycorn]

Australia has tough gun laws.
They have very few gun deaths.

We have tons of guns.
We have tons of gun deaths.

Coincidence? No.

So is that because of guns or something else?

If you look at the chart (ask if you can't find it) you will see that Australia had just as many gun deaths and murders before the gun ban as after. One change that did take place is that rapes in Australia went up 50% after the ban was put into place (scroll back to my earlier post 647 with the charts.)

True, if you have more guns, you will have more gun deaths, just like if you have more knives, you will have more knife deaths, and if you have more cars on the road, you will have more vehicle deaths.

You have to realize - liberals don't care the people die. They just want to ban an inanimate object that they were conditioned to have an irrational fear of.

More people die every single year in automobiles than by firearms - yet every liberal is happy to ride in a vehicle and none of them call to ban automobiles.

Cars are super regulated. Safety inspected each year in most states. You must carry liability insurance. You must have a license to operate one. Have built in safety features in many models such as collision avoidance, safety belts, and air bags. Cops set up checkpoints at random to make sure the drivers are sober, you have insurance, and are licensed to be firing err I mean driving.

Put those well-regulated implements into firearms and you’ll see a bunch of people feel a lot better.

Would you mind?

 

[P@triot]

Are you willing to implement the same rules here?

Kudos on your cut & paste. It doesn't change the fact that they have the highest gun ownership in the world (nearly 1 out of two people) - exceeding the U.S. And they have a lower crime rate. If liberals would stop banning firearms in Chicago, New York, D.C., etc. - we would do. The blood is on your hands Corny. Somehow, I don't think you really care though.

Got your dancing shoes on early today…..

That is what a “well regulated militia” looks like and what-do-you-know…very few gun deaths because whack jobs like you that think they should be able to buy landmines are laughed out of the room.

Thanks for proving my point better than I ever could have.

What a bizarre response (as I pointed out - that is a trend with you as you continue to be so thoroughly defeated). I didn't "dance" at all. I didn't avoid the question (as you liberals do), I didn't change the subject (as you liberals do), I didn't give a nonsensical response (as you liberals do). I addressed it head on and proved that more guns in the hands of citizens equals more peace.