The Moment Sandy Hook Parents start cashing in their kids..

[PGreen]

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot. On average, 32 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Every day on average, 51 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 45 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun. The reality is really frightening. Is there any hope, that the situation can change?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think (unlike you) that a civilized nation needs to reduce the proliferation of guns when experience strongly suggests that the laws today are ineffective in protecting innocent lives.

Anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control needs to be licensed, insured and free from any conviction of a crime of violence, never detained as a danger to themselves or others (CA W&I Code 5150) (including spending a night in the drunk tank [647ff of the CA Penal Code) or an addict of AOL (alcohol or other drugs).

For a start.

BTW, the NRA (our local terrorist outfit) failed in their effort to prevent the confirmation of the newest Surgeon General of the US, simply because he supports gun control. Kudos to those Senators who were not intimidated by the terrorists and voted their conscience.

I know far more gun owners than members of the NRA ... And if you speak about protecting innocent lives ... You have to count the lives guns have saved as well.

If you think more regulations are required as far as licensing and whatnot ... Good luck getting it passed.

.

I never see the gun grabbers talk about punishing people who commit crimes with guns only restricting the rights of people who will never commit a crime with a gun.

IMO All gun crimes should be elevated to federal crimes with a mandatory 25 year sentence without parole for gun crimes that do not result in a death and mandatory life in prison or execution for those that do result in death.

Let's see how much gun crimes decrease if we actually focus on the fucking criminals for a change.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

No, it was actually about a lawsuit. This must be hard for you, keeping focused. You immediately went off on a gun laws tangent. Maybe you don't know the difference between criminal law and tort. But you go on with your bad self questioning the intelligence of others.

You done yet? Perhaps you can go back to wishing grieving parents go to hell.

Just let me know.

I don't wish for anyone to go to hell. Even you. Do you actually have something intelligent to say about the lawsuit?

Page 1....you ignored it though because it didn't fit your selfish agenda.

You briefly mentioned the lawsuit as a segway to ranting about gun laws, which have nothing to do with the civil suit.

What does claiming that these parents are going to hell have to do with the law suit?

Nothing. Why?

 

[RKMBrown]

No, it was actually about a lawsuit. This must be hard for you, keeping focused. You immediately went off on a gun laws tangent. Maybe you don't know the difference between criminal law and tort. But you go on with your bad self questioning the intelligence of others.

You done yet? Perhaps you can go back to wishing grieving parents go to hell.

Just let me know.

I don't wish for anyone to go to hell. Even you. Do you actually have something intelligent to say about the lawsuit?

Page 1....you ignored it though because it didn't fit your selfish agenda.

You briefly mentioned the lawsuit as a segway to ranting about gun laws, which have nothing to do with the civil suit.

Of course they do. Have someone who doesn't have a hard-on for guns explain it to you.

When the law allows production of nuclear power plants, guns etc., civil suits are used to make said activities to costly to be worthwhile. This is how the libtards are destroying America's economy. They will not be happy until most of us are dead and the rest are living like indians & cave men.

 

[BlackSand]

I think (unlike you) that a civilized nation needs to reduce the proliferation of guns when experience strongly suggests that the laws today are ineffective in protecting innocent lives.

Anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control needs to be licensed, insured and free from any conviction of a crime of violence, never detained as a danger to themselves or others (CA W&I Code 5150) (including spending a night in the drunk tank [647ff of the CA Penal Code) or an addict of AOL (alcohol or other drugs).

For a start.

BTW, the NRA (our local terrorist outfit) failed in their effort to prevent the confirmation of the newest Surgeon General of the US, simply because he supports gun control. Kudos to those Senators who were not intimidated by the terrorists and voted their conscience.

I know far more gun owners than members of the NRA ... And if you speak about protecting innocent lives ... You have to count the lives guns have saved as well.

If you think more regulations are required as far as licensing and whatnot ... Good luck getting it passed.

.

I never see the gun grabbers talk about punishing people who commit crimes with guns only restricting the rights of people who will never commit a crime with a gun.

IMO All gun crimes should be elevated to federal crimes with a mandatory 25 year sentence without parole for gun crimes that do not result in a death and mandatory life in prison or execution for those that do result in death.

Let's see how much gun crimes decrease if we actually focus on the fucking criminals for a change.

I think it is more interesting how they think additional legislation will result in reducing weapons proliferation ... When more guns are sold whenever they introduce more legislation.

I suppose that is what happens when you propose legislation that opposes the rights and will of the people.

It is even more interesting how they think any of that will turn out well if they continue.

.

 

[RDD_1210]

Effective


Better?

Yes. Now specify what the hell tightness means to you, and what the measure of effectiveness will be, reduction in crime, reduction in gun sales, reduction in innocent deaths, reduction in suicides, reduction in suicides by gun, reduction in guns held by criminals vs guns held by law abiding citizens... etc. IOW your statements are broad brush stroke political ramblings that have no clear meaning.

Reduction in access to guns.

Thanks for proving my point.

How many situations like this has Australia had since real gun laws were implemented? How many have we had?

Again, laws don't do away with anything 100%. Rape is illegal but it still happens, that doesn't mean we get rid of rape laws because they can't stop it 100% of the time.

Your example only proves that the right laws can reduce mass shootings. Australia is proof of it.

Rape laws don't involve me losing a constitutional right.

Repeal the 2nd amendment if you want to remove that right, until then go pound sand.

Oh look it's Marty, here to invent my argument for me.

Thanks Marty!

You have no argument. You have standard gun grabber drivel, that is all.

Please tell me more about what my argument is. I need to know what I think about this topic. Please don't keep me in the dark Marty!

Or you could learn to write without using broad brush stroke feel good campaign slogans.

What do you do for

You done yet? Perhaps you can go back to wishing grieving parents go to hell.

Just let me know.

I don't wish for anyone to go to hell. Even you. Do you actually have something intelligent to say about the lawsuit?

Page 1....you ignored it though because it didn't fit your selfish agenda.

You briefly mentioned the lawsuit as a segway to ranting about gun laws, which have nothing to do with the civil suit.

Of course they do. Have someone who doesn't have a hard-on for guns explain it to you.

When the law allows production of nuclear power plants, guns etc., civil suits are used to make said activities to costly to be worthwhile. This is how the libtards are destroying America's economy. They will not be happy until most of us are dead and the rest are living like indians & cave men.

Yup, pretty much. I don't know how you caught on to the plan so quickly. But obviously your superior intellect and years of complaining on the internet have helped to fine tune your keen sense of impending doom.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot. On average, 32 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Every day on average, 51 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 45 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun. The reality is really frightening. Is there any hope, that the situation can change?

Your "facts" are not facts. All self defense shootings, accidents, and police shootings are conflated with criminal activity. This is how liars use statistics to lie. So stop lying.

 

[RDD_1210]

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot. On average, 32 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Every day on average, 51 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 45 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun. The reality is really frightening. Is there any hope, that the situation can change?

Your "facts" are not facts. All self defense shootings, accidents, and police shootings are conflated with criminal activity. This is how liars use statistics to lie. So stop lying.

Says you.

Must be nice to be able to make yourself the authority on so many topics.

 

[mdk]

You done yet? Perhaps you can go back to wishing grieving parents go to hell.

Just let me know.

I don't wish for anyone to go to hell. Even you. Do you actually have something intelligent to say about the lawsuit?

Page 1....you ignored it though because it didn't fit your selfish agenda.

You briefly mentioned the lawsuit as a segway to ranting about gun laws, which have nothing to do with the civil suit.

What does claiming that these parents are going to hell have to do with the law suit?

Nothing. Why?

I was confused since you were chiding another poster for bringing up gun laws which have nothing to do with the case either. Perhaps you should take your own advice since whether these parents are going to hell or not has nothing to do with this case.

 

[RKMBrown]

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot. On average, 32 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Every day on average, 51 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 45 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun. The reality is really frightening. Is there any hope, that the situation can change?

Take guns away and people will commit suicide with other tools. Taking guns away won't change a person's decision to kill themselves. People hang themselves too, does that mean we should ban ropes, ties, trees?

 

[RKMBrown]

Yes. Now specify what the hell tightness means to you, and what the measure of effectiveness will be, reduction in crime, reduction in gun sales, reduction in innocent deaths, reduction in suicides, reduction in suicides by gun, reduction in guns held by criminals vs guns held by law abiding citizens... etc. IOW your statements are broad brush stroke political ramblings that have no clear meaning.

Reduction in access to guns.

Rape laws don't involve me losing a constitutional right.

Repeal the 2nd amendment if you want to remove that right, until then go pound sand.

Oh look it's Marty, here to invent my argument for me.

Thanks Marty!

You have no argument. You have standard gun grabber drivel, that is all.

Please tell me more about what my argument is. I need to know what I think about this topic. Please don't keep me in the dark Marty!

Or you could learn to write without using broad brush stroke feel good campaign slogans.

What do you do for

I don't wish for anyone to go to hell. Even you. Do you actually have something intelligent to say about the lawsuit?

Page 1....you ignored it though because it didn't fit your selfish agenda.

You briefly mentioned the lawsuit as a segway to ranting about gun laws, which have nothing to do with the civil suit.

Of course they do. Have someone who doesn't have a hard-on for guns explain it to you.

When the law allows production of nuclear power plants, guns etc., civil suits are used to make said activities to costly to be worthwhile. This is how the libtards are destroying America's economy. They will not be happy until most of us are dead and the rest are living like indians & cave men.

Yup, pretty much. I don't know how you caught on to the plan so quickly. But obviously your superior intellect and years of complaining on the internet have helped to fine tune your keen sense of impending doom.

You said, "What do you do for," which is not discernible English. You are mumbling, please try again.

Yes, I do have "superior intellect" and I have been around and on the internet since it's inception.

However, your lie about my sense of impending doom, is just a lie. That's not what I said, retard.

 

[BlackSand]

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot. On average, 32 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Every day on average, 51 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 45 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun. The reality is really frightening. Is there any hope, that the situation can change?

Take guns away and people will commit suicide with other tools. Taking guns away won't change a person's decision to kill themselves. People hang themselves too, does that mean we should ban ropes, ties, trees?

I think it would make more sense if those who desire to stem weapons proliferation stumbled across the idea their desires are self defeating.

Introduce more legislation ... More weapons are sold as a result.

Not that anyone wants anything to take a turn for the worse ... But it seems that those who keep asking for more measures against firearms proliferation ... Are just setting themselves up for ultimate failure.

.

 

[RKMBrown]

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot. On average, 32 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Every day on average, 51 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 45 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun. The reality is really frightening. Is there any hope, that the situation can change?

Take guns away and people will commit suicide with other tools. Taking guns away won't change a person's decision to kill themselves. People hang themselves too, does that mean we should ban ropes, ties, trees?

I think it would make more sense if those who desire to stem weapons proliferation stumbled across the idea their desires are self defeating.

Introduce more legislation ... More weapons are sold as a result.

.

ban em and it goes underground just like booze did....

 

[BlackSand]

ban em and it goes underground just like booze did....

They don't even have to ban them ... Just take measures against them. Every time they have tried to ban or restrict firearms ... More weapons were sold in the market.

Edit:
If they went underground like booze did ... Perhaps we would just end up with more Kennedy's.

.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Hey have you guys started talking about the culture he grew up in or the family structure of whites yet?

I'm interested in why there hasnt been a call for the white leaders to denounce this sort of Violence? Maybe because whites are just violent people? Or this is about their drug culture?

Nothing?

 

[RKMBrown]

Hey have you guys started talking about the culture he grew up in or the family structure of whites yet?

I'm interested in why there hasnt been a call for the white leaders to denounce this sort of Violence? Maybe because whites are just violent people? Or this is about their drug culture?

Nothing?

Pull your head out of the sand.. the discussion about this being the result of a dumb ass mother that decided to teach a drugged out mentally handicapped insane child to shoot weapons and give him free access to them has been discussed incessantly.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I think (unlike you) that a civilized nation needs to reduce the proliferation of guns when experience strongly suggests that the laws today are ineffective in protecting innocent lives.

Anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control needs to be licensed, insured and free from any conviction of a crime of violence, never detained as a danger to themselves or others (CA W&I Code 5150) (including spending a night in the drunk tank [647ff of the CA Penal Code) or an addict of AOL (alcohol or other drugs).

For a start.

BTW, the NRA (our local terrorist outfit) failed in their effort to prevent the confirmation of the newest Surgeon General of the US, simply because he supports gun control. Kudos to those Senators who were not intimidated by the terrorists and voted their conscience.

I know far more gun owners than members of the NRA ... And if you speak about protecting innocent lives ... You have to count the lives guns have saved as well.

If you think more regulations are required as far as licensing and whatnot ... Good luck getting it passed.

.

I never see the gun grabbers talk about punishing people who commit crimes with guns only restricting the rights of people who will never commit a crime with a gun.

IMO All gun crimes should be elevated to federal crimes with a mandatory 25 year sentence without parole for gun crimes that do not result in a death and mandatory life in prison or execution for those that do result in death.

Let's see how much gun crimes decrease if we actually focus on the fucking criminals for a change.

The problem with your solution is there is no litmus test to know who will take the life of someone before they do. At least allowing a State to License anyone who lives or comes into CA who wants to buy, posses or have in his or her custody and control a firearm, we can have a complete background check to determine the risk.

Of course a License is only the first step. A comprehensive law would require anyone who wants to sell a gun to record the license number of the buyer, and verify it has not been suspended or revoked. Failure to do so would cause the sellers license to be revoked. Anyone unlicensed who owned, possessed or had in his or her custody and control a gun would be subject to imprisonment and/or a fine.

 

[Iceweasel]

The problem with your solution is there is no litmus test to know who will take the life of someone before they do. At least allowing a State to License anyone who lives or comes into CA who wants to buy, posses or have in his or her custody and control a firearm, we can have a complete background check to determine the risk.

Of course a License is only the first step. A comprehensive law would require anyone who wants to sell a gun to record the license number of the buyer, and verify it has not been suspended or revoked. Failure to do so would cause the sellers license to be revoked. Anyone unlicensed who owned, possessed or had in his or her custody and control a gun would be subject to imprisonment and/or a fine.

There's no litmus test in determining who will drive drunk and kill someone either, and driving isn't even a right. I think there should be a comprehensive law against anyone that would actively seek to overturn the Constitution. Their license to free speech should be suspended.

 

[BlackSand]

The problem with your solution is there is no litmus test to know who will take the life of someone before they do. At least allowing a State to License anyone who lives or comes into CA who wants to buy, posses or have in his or her custody and control a firearm, we can have a complete background check to determine the risk.

Of course a License is only the first step. A comprehensive law would require anyone who wants to sell a gun to record the license number of the buyer, and verify it has not been suspended or revoked. Failure to do so would cause the sellers license to be revoked. Anyone unlicensed who owned, possessed or had in his or her custody and control a gun would be subject to imprisonment and/or a fine.

A licensed gun owner doesn't address your concerns towards weapons proliferation. I have a license but that doesn't address how many weapons I can own. Perhaps you want registration of each weapon ... Which still doesn't stop crime ... And the only use the government could have with registration would be in conjunction with the possible desire to seize the weapons from law abiding citizens. Law abiding citizens with a license and registered weapons will not stop criminals.

Furthermore ... The crime is what you hope to stop ... And crimes already have punishments. Anyone not legally approved to own a firearm now is already subject to a fine and/or imprisonment.

.

 

[mudwhistle]

Good for them. This is the worst situation possible for them and NOTHING has changed from it. Nothing. Fuck gun lobbyists who prevent any sort of real legislation passing that would help cut down on these situations occurring. You can't sue lobbyists and this is America so the gun makers are the next most logical target. If they don't want to be sued then don't make guns.

Go ahead gun nuts, lets have it.

What law would have prevented this?

The laws that we'll never have in this country. And nothing will prevent this all together, I said "cut down" (ie. reduce). But it doesn't matter, we live in a society full of selfish assholes and will never have any meaningful gun control put in place.

The problem is your timing sucks. Blacks are roaming the streets essentially shouting "KILL WHITE COPS" and you want to grab our guns..


Obviously you're an idiot.

I do? Shit, I learn more about what I want and what my opinion is from this website every time I visit.

A gun-grabber trying to play dumb, while he's advocating grabbing guns has become only too commonplace. We all know the endgame here. Don't make yourself look any more foolish than you already do