The Right To Bear Arms

[Cecilie1200]

The common sense approach is why have we had gun shootings in schools only within the last 23 years? We have had guns for a lot longer than that, yet the school shootings are now increasing in frequency. The shootings are the symptoms of a much bigger issue and banning guns like Issa wants, will not change anything, the problem will still be there.

Is not just school shootings my friend, Americans have been shooting each other since day one.

Again, this is a symptom and you don't want to address it, that's fine but until you cure the disease will persist, gun or no gun.

Guns....people here when they lose it, they pick a gun and shoot. Other societies where guns are within reach, they fight, they use non lethal stuff till they cool down, arrested or stopped. Some rough areas I've been to overseas, fights left and right and there was always a saying if it guns were available like in the US lot of people would lose their lives.
Banning guns for sure it was stop all murders, but it will lower it dramatically, ther will be less mass shootings if any.

No, in other societies they just use a different lethal weapon. I'm really over your pretense that gun-banning societies don't have mass murders. Lie to yourself, if you want, but don't expect anyone else to believe you.

Really, me girl. What mass shootings are you talking about? Want to try Australia? How about Japan? France? The UK? Germany? Sweden? Italy?
Are you suggesting they are useing knives, me girl. Cause if so, you loose. Shoes? Volcanoes? Perhaps you should back up your claims with some proof. Or do you think we should simply believe you. Though we seldom actually believe dipshits. Which tends to leave you out.
There are those who need and love assault rifles, and consider them their right to own. Like you. And there are the rest of us, who value the lives of people. Like the people of the other 35 advanced nations of the world.
No one needs an assault rifle. Just as no one needs an F16. Both should be outlawed for the good of our children.

1) I said "mass killings", not "mass shootings". Don't fucking try that goalpost-moving bullshit on me.

2) THESE would be the mass killings I'm talking about.

Monash University shooting - Wikipedia

A History of Mass Killings in Japan

Paris massacre: At least 128 die in attacks - CNN

Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia

2016 Munich shooting - Wikipedia

2 killed, about dozen wounded in Swedish restaurant shooting

Italian male nurse shoots four people dead, including his brother and sister-in-law, during shotgun rampage in mafia-infested Naples after 'row over a clothes line' | Daily Mail Online

Some use knives, some STILL use guns, some use bombs, or cars, or fire. It's almost like the problem is violent humans, not the tools used.

3) I don't require anyone to simply believe me. To the contrary, I encourage you to actually research the subject, rather than just taking the media's word for it. Talk about believing dipshits.

4) No one asked you what you think anyone "needs". And only idiots like you think disarming law-abiding citizens is "for the good" of anyone.

 

[P@triot]

No, the lead cause of mass murder is the same as it's always been: humans.

Ban them! It’s time to ban humans!

The sad part is that the left literally advocates for that. Aside from their obsession with pushing abortion, I’ve actually heard lefties literally advocate for the extinction of the human race to “save” the earth. Think about the insanity of that. What purpose does the earth serve if not to support human life?

 

[Auld Phart]

You are correct they over the last 59 years the idea of banning guns is more unlikely than likely as the numbers are trending against banning guns altogether.

Things will change, the fabric of America will change. It's a small world and rapidly changing.

Good luck with your delusional belief that EVENTUALLY, you're going to convince the majority of Americans that they really don't want all that troublesome freedom.

Oh, wait, I forgot. Your plan is to overwhelm actual Americans with an invasion of illegal immigrants.

You gotta respect the will of the majority....as for now there is nothing one can do. But there will come time, where the 2nd amendment will be abolished I can assure you of that.
Your life doesn't depend on a gun, you can live without it....this isn't the wild wide west era.

You are correct there and that is why we as a nation will not ban guns.

You may want to stop being so paranoid. I have a pretty good idea I own more guns than you. And I am absolutely confident that none of the guns I own will be outlawed. You see, I have hunting guns. Not human killing guns.
In my humble but correct opinion, assault weapons are not needed or usfull for hunting, as compared to the alternatives.

You see, I have hunting guns. Not human killing guns.

Never seen someone so completely shove his foot into his mouth

 

[Papageorgio]

You are correct they over the last 59 years the idea of banning guns is more unlikely than likely as the numbers are trending against banning guns altogether.

Things will change, the fabric of America will change. It's a small world and rapidly changing.

Good luck with your delusional belief that EVENTUALLY, you're going to convince the majority of Americans that they really don't want all that troublesome freedom.

Oh, wait, I forgot. Your plan is to overwhelm actual Americans with an invasion of illegal immigrants.

You gotta respect the will of the majority....as for now there is nothing one can do. But there will come time, where the 2nd amendment will be abolished I can assure you of that.
Your life doesn't depend on a gun, you can live without it....this isn't the wild wide west era.

You are correct there and that is why we as a nation will not ban guns.

You may want to stop being so paranoid. I have a pretty good idea I own more guns than you. And I am absolutely confident that none of the guns I own will be outlawed. You see, I have hunting guns. Not human killing guns.
In my humble but correct opinion, assault weapons are not needed or usfull for hunting, as compared to the alternatives.

How am I paranoid? I have no issue with you having guns. I have no doubt that you also have more guns than I do because I don’t own a gun and don’t plan on it.

Repealing the 2nd Amendment will never happen as Issa is claiming it will.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Yet it's done by individuals that set up their own booth. And don't tell me it isn't done.

Didn't one of your little hate shits like Colbert or Madcow, or some other evil Marxist fuck try and do a "sting" at a gun show, but couldn't get anyone to sell them a gun?

Yeah, think I'll look that up, it was funny as hell.

One of the major lies of the anti-civil rights movement blew up in their face...

 

[Rigby5]

It is silly to restrict firearms at all because not only do you depend on guns to defend you from gangs, mafia, psychos, rapists, etc., but you depend on guns to defend you from foreign threats as well.
But the problem is that if you don't want to have to be responsible for actually doing it yourself, you prefer to make others do it, even though by irresponsibly evading your personal duty, you risk this country being turned into a police state by corrupt politicians.

Clearly the founders instead wanted each and every able bodied person to do their part in defense, so that no corrupt mercenary police force or military could ever threaten our democratic republic. And you would throw that all away.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

It's kind of like watching a nuclear explosion in slow motion. If one were to explode outside D.C. in real time it would be a shock to say the least. But if it was happening in slow motion, say, slowed down 100 times, people wouldn't see the problem for what it is and would probably say "Look at the pretty mushroom cloud."

As horrifying and shocking as these mass shootings are, people are dying in much greater numbers in slow motion on the highways and by heart disease and cancer and other things.

People, by nature, are narrow minded and short sighted and act on emotions and nowhere is that more evident today than in our young people and a lot of those on the left of the political spectrum. If not one person died in a motor vehicle accident this year but you had the same number of people die in a bombing or a mass shooting (about 40,000), the whole country would go apeshit and gun control advocates would storm the Capital building and hold Congress hostage until they banned guns.

We change what we can change. We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way. Can you imagine how much you are going to scream when they outlaw you driving your car? That's not that far into the future. That may bring traffic deaths to zero but it's not going to be painless.

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

My point was not to show that traffic fatalities are higher, my point was to illustrate how people are shocked and react emotionally when a lot of people die all at once. If there were mass shootings across the country tomorrow and 40,000 people were killed, you can bet that they would ban firearms the next day. At the very least, there would be an immediate temporary ban. But because 40,000 people die in slow motion throughout the year on the highways and out of our sight and mind for the most part, nobody gives it a second thought.

Your point is to try and make us look at something we can't currently change so that we won't look at something we CAN currently change. Simple as that. "Hey, Look Over There".

Of course we can change it. You just told me yourself that "We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way."

Like I told Derp, it is not my intention to divert the focus or direction of the conversation. My intention is to show how gun control advocates, while ostensibly proposing a solution to reduce deaths, get emotional and fired up over 17 deaths by firearms but have nothing to say about the 40,000 deaths by motor vehicle accidents every year.

When it comes to human fatalities, people can be highly subjective about which manner of death to address. To the point that it becomes clear before long that it's not so much the number of deaths that they're concerned about, but rather the manner of the deaths.

Even one person murdered in anger is wrong.

You're absolutely right. But even one dead person due to someone else's negligence and recklessness on the highway is wrong.

According to iihs.org (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) which gets its numbers from the U.S. Department of Transportation's FARS (Fatality Analysis System) Report, there were a total of 37,461 highway fatalities in 2016. Of these, there were a total of 723 fatalities of children 12 years and younger. Of these, 228 were not wearing seatbelts or were otherwise unrestrained. And these numbers do not even include the number of fatalities of children 12 years and younger who were killed by vehicles as pedestrians and while riding bicycles (195 and 34, respectively).

Speaking strictly in terms of numbers, I would say that this is the greater tragedy. Especially when you consider the ones that were not restrained, in spite of the law. This is gross criminal negligence on the part of the drivers. They may as well have shot the kids with an AR-15 before leaving the house.

 

[oreo]

Drowning is an accident, picking a gun and killing is not. Apples and oranges here.

Picking up a brick can accomplish the same thing.

Can you mass kill with a brick?

Yes.

You can commit mass murder with a can of gasoline, a car, a truck, a truck with a snow plow would be very effective you can commit mass murder with a knife, and yes a gun and probably a hundred other things

The lead cause of mass murder now are guns.

No, the lead cause of mass murder is the same as it's always been: humans.

True but you don't hand over weapons of mass destruction to do it. We can't fix how someone grew up, what their inter thoughts & beliefs are but we sure as hell can stop them from acquiring weapons that can kill hundred's within minutes.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Gun violence can only be dealt with by dealing with those who commit it. Most gun violence is the result of repeat offenders. Over 500,000 crimes a year, in the U.S., are the result of repeat offenders. And there are nowhere that many committing those crimes. Deal with them, and you deal with the problem.

Once more, you are using the "Hey, Look Over There" routine. The Mass Shooters usually don't have any criminal records at all. And that is what we should be dealing with. What can we do to either stop or minimize the body count in these shooting.

Mass shootings are responsible for a very small percentage of deaths. They are just a drop in the bucket. Most gun crime is the result of repeat offenders. That's the ugly truth.

It's kind of like watching a nuclear explosion in slow motion. If one were to explode outside D.C. in real time it would be a shock to say the least. But if it was happening in slow motion, say, slowed down 100 times, people wouldn't see the problem for what it is and would probably say "Look at the pretty mushroom cloud."

As horrifying and shocking as these mass shootings are, people are dying in much greater numbers in slow motion on the highways and by heart disease and cancer and other things.

People, by nature, are narrow minded and short sighted and act on emotions and nowhere is that more evident today than in our young people and a lot of those on the left of the political spectrum. If not one person died in a motor vehicle accident this year but you had the same number of people die in a bombing or a mass shooting (about 40,000), the whole country would go apeshit and gun control advocates would storm the Capital building and hold Congress hostage until they banned guns.

We change what we can change. We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way. Can you imagine how much you are going to scream when they outlaw you driving your car? That's not that far into the future. That may bring traffic deaths to zero but it's not going to be painless.

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

And outlawing cars for people who are careful, responsible drivers simply because there are people who are not is just as stupid as outlawing guns for people who are careful, responsible gun owners simply because there are lunatics.

And exactly where have I indicated where I proposed outlawing cars or firearms for that reason? You GunCrazies will say anything. You are not better than the Gungrabbers.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

We change what we can change. We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way. Can you imagine how much you are going to scream when they outlaw you driving your car? That's not that far into the future. That may bring traffic deaths to zero but it's not going to be painless.

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

My point was not to show that traffic fatalities are higher, my point was to illustrate how people are shocked and react emotionally when a lot of people die all at once. If there were mass shootings across the country tomorrow and 40,000 people were killed, you can bet that they would ban firearms the next day. At the very least, there would be an immediate temporary ban. But because 40,000 people die in slow motion throughout the year on the highways and out of our sight and mind for the most part, nobody gives it a second thought.

Your point is to try and make us look at something we can't currently change so that we won't look at something we CAN currently change. Simple as that. "Hey, Look Over There".

Of course we can change it. You just told me yourself that "We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way."

Like I told Derp, it is not my intention to divert the focus or direction of the conversation. My intention is to show how gun control advocates, while ostensibly proposing a solution to reduce deaths, get emotional and fired up over 17 deaths by firearms but have nothing to say about the 40,000 deaths by motor vehicle accidents every year.

When it comes to human fatalities, people can be highly subjective about which manner of death to address. To the point that it becomes clear before long that it's not so much the number of deaths that they're concerned about, but rather the manner of the deaths.

Even one person murdered in anger is wrong.

True, but murder has been part of human history for as long as there have been humans, so if your goal is to eliminate all murder, you're defeated at the outset, and everything you do is going to be wrong, as well.

when you can minimize the body count you MUST do it. To totally ignore that factor makes you as guilty as the person pulling the trigger.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

Sadly, your profoundly ignorant progressive “fix” continues to increase the body count.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results each time. You people have banned, outlawed, regulated, legislated, and restricted your way to more dead children. Left-wing policy always ends in failure because it is built on ignorance and emotion.

You keep spewing the same thing and we keep doing what you demand. Looks to me like that is the definition of stupid. Some of us are trying to introduce common sense.

 

[asaratis]

My point was not to show that traffic fatalities are higher, my point was to illustrate how people are shocked and react emotionally when a lot of people die all at once. If there were mass shootings across the country tomorrow and 40,000 people were killed, you can bet that they would ban firearms the next day. At the very least, there would be an immediate temporary ban. But because 40,000 people die in slow motion throughout the year on the highways and out of our sight and mind for the most part, nobody gives it a second thought.

Your point is to try and make us look at something we can't currently change so that we won't look at something we CAN currently change. Simple as that. "Hey, Look Over There".

Of course we can change it. You just told me yourself that "We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way."

Like I told Derp, it is not my intention to divert the focus or direction of the conversation. My intention is to show how gun control advocates, while ostensibly proposing a solution to reduce deaths, get emotional and fired up over 17 deaths by firearms but have nothing to say about the 40,000 deaths by motor vehicle accidents every year.

When it comes to human fatalities, people can be highly subjective about which manner of death to address. To the point that it becomes clear before long that it's not so much the number of deaths that they're concerned about, but rather the manner of the deaths.

Even one person murdered in anger is wrong.

True, but murder has been part of human history for as long as there have been humans, so if your goal is to eliminate all murder, you're defeated at the outset, and everything you do is going to be wrong, as well.

when you can minimize the body count you MUST do it. To totally ignore that factor makes you as guilty as the person pulling the trigger.

The body count was minimized in the Texas church shooting when a citizen with a rifle wounded the chickenshit shooter and caused him to vacate the scene.

This is diametrically opposed the actions of the chickenshit deputies that refused to confront the crazed shooter in Broward County Florida.

 

[asaratis]

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

Sadly, your profoundly ignorant progressive “fix” continues to increase the body count.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results each time. You people have banned, outlawed, regulated, legislated, and restricted your way to more dead children. Left-wing policy always ends in failure because it is built on ignorance and emotion.

You keep spewing the same thing and we keep doing what you demand. Looks to me like that is the definition of stupid. Some of us are trying to introduce common sense.

Common sense includes shooting back at the shooter...and preventing crazy bastards from obtaining guns. It definitely does not include disarming the law abiding American public. In the latter case, only criminals and the police would have guns. As demonstrated by the chickenshit deputies in Broward County, the police having guns on site sometimes means NOTHING!

 

[P@triot]

Some of us are trying to introduce common sense.

You did that already. You banned firearms on school grounds. How did that work out?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Your point is to try and make us look at something we can't currently change so that we won't look at something we CAN currently change. Simple as that. "Hey, Look Over There".

Of course we can change it. You just told me yourself that "We have done quite a bit to slow down traffic deaths and more is on the way."

Like I told Derp, it is not my intention to divert the focus or direction of the conversation. My intention is to show how gun control advocates, while ostensibly proposing a solution to reduce deaths, get emotional and fired up over 17 deaths by firearms but have nothing to say about the 40,000 deaths by motor vehicle accidents every year.

When it comes to human fatalities, people can be highly subjective about which manner of death to address. To the point that it becomes clear before long that it's not so much the number of deaths that they're concerned about, but rather the manner of the deaths.

Even one person murdered in anger is wrong.

True, but murder has been part of human history for as long as there have been humans, so if your goal is to eliminate all murder, you're defeated at the outset, and everything you do is going to be wrong, as well.

when you can minimize the body count you MUST do it. To totally ignore that factor makes you as guilty as the person pulling the trigger.

The body count was minimized in the Texas church shooting when a citizen with a rifle wounded the chickenshit shooter and caused him to vacate the scene.

This is diametrically opposed the actions of the chickenshit deputies that refused to confront the crazed shooter in Broward County Florida.

Are you aware just how rare that behavior is? Even the Cops have to continually train to keep their ability to react properly. There are functions of the body that get in the way even if you are well armed. Normal People have it built into us.

 

[P@triot]

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

Sadly, your profoundly ignorant progressive “fix” continues to increase the body count.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results each time. You people have banned, outlawed, regulated, legislated, and restricted your way to more dead children. Left-wing policy always ends in failure because it is built on ignorance and emotion.

You keep spewing the same thing and we keep doing what you demand.

It speaks volumes that you have to resort to lying. You’ve never done what conservatives advocate. Never.

Allow all permit holders to carry concealed on schools grounds (including teachers). Have armed security on site. Guarantee you’ll never see a mass shooting again.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Some of us are trying to introduce common sense.

You did that already. You banned firearms on school grounds. How did that work out?

And you undid it when you didn't follow the four points I suggested. You made killing fields all over the place. And it wouldn't matter if the Teachers were armed or not. The Teachers would just become the first fatalities.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And we need to approach the Mass Shootings the same way. We need to fix what we can fix even if it's just to minimize the body count.

Sadly, your profoundly ignorant progressive “fix” continues to increase the body count.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results each time. You people have banned, outlawed, regulated, legislated, and restricted your way to more dead children. Left-wing policy always ends in failure because it is built on ignorance and emotion.

You keep spewing the same thing and we keep doing what you demand.

It speaks volumes that you have to resort to lying. You’ve never done what conservatives advocate. Never.

Allow all permit holders to carry concealed on schools grounds (including teachers). Have armed security on site. Guarantee you’ll never see a mass shooting again.

Until the Bad Guy realizes that the armed teacher is more a liability than an asset and an easy target. You really think "Call to Arms" is like real life?

 

[P@triot]

Are you aware just how rare that behavior is? Even the Cops have to continually train to keep their ability to react properly.

Are you aware of how astoundingly ignorant every post you make is? Here is an average elderly man with a concealed carry permit responding. He doesn’t train with the Navy Seals. He’s an ordinary citizen responding like millions of ordinary citizens do every year...

Florida man who shot suspects during Internet cafe robbery will not face charges

 

[P@triot]

Until the Bad Guy realizes that the armed teacher is more a liability than an asset and an easy target. You really think "Call to Arms" is like real life?

Oh snowflake....this isn’t Hollywood. Sociopaths aren’t looking for a shootout. They are looking for unarmed victims. They won’t even show up if they know teacher are armed (much less specifically seek them out).

You continue to spout nothing but pure nonsense. Nobody is taking you seriously because you post stupid shit like this.