What if she didn't have a gun?

[KevinWestern]

Ummm, yeah, probably. Still, no excuse for making it easy for them and less excuse for the 80% of gun deaths which are people who brought a gun into the house to "protect" themselves.

Hey - Joe - wanna know why I'm bitter? Because instead of going after handguns (the type of weapon involved in a super majority of all gun homicides annually) we got hit with an influx of "AR-15", "Assault rifle" propaganda by the folks on the left despite semi-auto rifles being responsible for under 25 deaths annually in the US. The media blew the significance way out of proportion.

100,000 die on prescription drugs, 7,000 die from handgun homicides, and we're focusing on a weapon that kills 25 people annually. Disingenuous the entire way through. It irks me to death.

Perhaps if "the left" (or whomever you want to call it) were to approach the situation a bit more logically you wouldn't have such a huge backlash right now.

 

[KevinWestern]

5 Justices found FOR Heller, 4 against. That tells me that this really is one septegenarian heart attacck away from a sensible interpretation.

An official ruling is a ruling. It trumps your opinion and my opinion on all counts in this democracy. Fortunately (for me) the ruling is consistent with my views..

SO you wingnuts are going to stop trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, then?

Didn't think so.

Scalia dies of a heart attack and is replaced by Lawrence Tribe. Game, Set Match, baby!

Joe- you're beginning to sound like just another mindless-talking sheep head. Do you notice how I was talking with Brain in a heated, but still respectful manner? Why do you have to use stupid terms like "wingnuts" and make assumptions like I'm anti-abortion simply because I believe that it's important that Americans have a right to own firearms?

I've been on both sides of the aisle throughout my life on a variety of issues and when it comes to the gun one I just happen to land on "the right".

Learn to talk to people with respect; you'll come off as more intelligent that way.

 

[JoeB131]

Whole lot of flaws with that statement.

Flaw 1- Colonists didn't have that many guns to start with. In fact, when the war started, the continental congress had a very hard time getting guns. The influx of weapons that turned the tide was because Louis XVI was willing to bankrupt his country to get back at the Brits by supporting us.

If the colonists didn’t have guns, would they have had a chance against the British? Please try answering the question.

I did. I'm sorry you were too stupid to udnerstand the answer. WOuld you like me to use smaller words?

[

Flaw 2- That is the Founding Slave Rapists lost, this would not have be a bad thing. YOu know what would have happened? We'd all be freaking Canadians. Which means we'd have sensible gun laws, universal health care, and slavery would have ended by royal decree instead of a pointless and bloody civil war. Can't see any of these things as bad, really.

Well, I guess I know with 100% certainty who I’m talking to right now. A self-loathing American who hates the founding fathers. Were they perfect? No. Were they all slave rapists? No, you disrespectful, ungrateful "American". Did they create a system of government that fostered an environment for innovation/capitalism that lifted up a country to became one of the best places on earth in any time period? Yes. Was this model of government adopted by many other countries due to how well it worked? Yes.

Actually, most countries avoided a lot of our stupidity. They learned from what we got "wrong".

Like allowing slavery.
And having a retarded way of picking Presidents.
And letting every inbred yahoo own a gun.

Incidently, I don't live in the FOunding Father's America, where only propertied white males could vote and a black was 3/5th of a free man and basically, we had a revolution so rich people wouldn't have to pay their taxes.

I live in the America that was built by Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt and JFK and LBJ, an egalitarian society that kept the empty promise of the slave rapists.

 

[JoeB131]

Ummm, yeah, probably. Still, no excuse for making it easy for them and less excuse for the 80% of gun deaths which are people who brought a gun into the house to "protect" themselves.

Hey - Joe - wanna know why I'm bitter? Because instead of going after handguns (the type of weapon involved in a super majority of all gun homicides annually) we got hit with an influx of "AR-15", "Assault rifle" propaganda by the folks on the left despite semi-auto rifles being responsible for under 25 deaths annually in the US. The media blew the significance way out of proportion.

100,000 die on prescription drugs, 7,000 die from handgun homicides, and we're focusing on a weapon that kills 25 people annually. Disingenuous the entire way through. It irks me to death.

Perhaps if "the left" (or whomever you want to call it) were to approach the situation a bit more logically you wouldn't have such a huge backlash right now.

What irks me is that psychoes like HOlmes and Lanza can get their hands on AR-15's and slaughter a lot of people. I'm not sure why this doesn't bother you, but I suspect you are compensating for "shortcomings' like most gun nuts.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Joe- you're beginning to sound like just another mindless-talking sheep head. Do you notice how I was talking with Brain in a heated, but still respectful manner? Why do you have to use stupid terms like "wingnuts" and make assumptions like I'm anti-abortion simply because I believe that it's important that Americans have a right to own firearms?

I've been on both sides of the aisle throughout my life on a variety of issues and when it comes to the gun one I just happen to land on "the right".

Learn to talk to people with respect; you'll come off as more intelligent that way.

Guy, if you bring intelligent arguments to the table, I'll be happy to address them.

If you are going to spew a lot of NRA propaganda because you are compensating for a tiny penis, not so much.

 

[Brain357]

We'll agree to disagree on this subject. I disagree with your reasoning. Military weapons will still be "controlled" by government and the defecting military will need to source from the citizen's arsenal.

Now your changing your own argument. You think the majority of the military wouldn't fight and would give up their arms now? That would be silly. If that were the case then the small minority with all the weapons would still win. But I don't think the majority would give up their weapons. More likely they would remove the tyranny.

Gotta go back to work, we can discuss later.

There are obviously going to be hostile/non-hostile regions. What if ¾ of the military was on the side of the citizens but you happened to live in an area heavy with military compliant to the Federal Government? What if that part of the Federal army was marching through your town? Wouldn’t you rather just have a rifle/shotgun to have the best fighting chance to protect your family in that scenario?

Even if the ¾ military could eventually defeat the ¼ military that didn’t defect, wouldn't it make for a much quicker battle if an additional 90 million armed americans joined in to squash the oppressive regime? Each year of war means millions additional dead...

If you think citizens owning guns aren’t a check on tyranny than I think you’re living too much within a modern, safe lens. The world hasn’t always been like it is in the US right now, and it we’re guaranteed nothing. Nothing, my friend.

I think the military are the best people this country has. I have no doubt they would recognize tyranny and end it. If it was 1/4 military vs 3/4 military I don't think there would even be any fighting. The 1/4 would know they couldn't win. They do all have the same training and weapons after all. And the 1/4 wouldn't exactly be fighting for a good cause.

How would the sides even get separated for a battle? Our military bases have people from all over the country in them. So on a base level you would have 25% for the tyrant and 75% against. The 75% would jail the 25% and then take out the tyrant.

 

[KevinWestern]

Ummm, yeah, probably. Still, no excuse for making it easy for them and less excuse for the 80% of gun deaths which are people who brought a gun into the house to "protect" themselves.

Hey - Joe - wanna know why I'm bitter? Because instead of going after handguns (the type of weapon involved in a super majority of all gun homicides annually) we got hit with an influx of "AR-15", "Assault rifle" propaganda by the folks on the left despite semi-auto rifles being responsible for under 25 deaths annually in the US. The media blew the significance way out of proportion.

100,000 die on prescription drugs, 7,000 die from handgun homicides, and we're focusing on a weapon that kills 25 people annually. Disingenuous the entire way through. It irks me to death.

Perhaps if "the left" (or whomever you want to call it) were to approach the situation a bit more logically you wouldn't have such a huge backlash right now.

What irks me is that psychoes like HOlmes and Lanza can get their hands on AR-15's and slaughter a lot of people. I'm not sure why this doesn't bother you, but I suspect you are compensating for "shortcomings' like most gun nuts.

If AR 15s kill 25 people annually, and handguns 7,000 (homicides), and you go after the AR 15 first, that irks me. Does not make a lot of sense.

It's disingenuous.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Are you really concerned that Bubba might off you by accident, or is this really just you trying to push people around? The chances are greater that some woman in a van clips you while texting "*OMG*" than you catching an errant round. That is unless you go to Colorado holding a sign saying "Gun-nutters can lick my balls!"

Yes, because that's the way to go around showing how rational you are on this subject, by threatenign to shoot people who diagree with you....

I'm really concerned Bubba might off SOMEONE by accident, because, as I've said, 32,000 gun deaths every year.

NOt sure how many texting while driving accidents there are, but here's the thing. Cops are really cracking down on that shit!

Yeah, that must be why I see it every damned day....

I've been checking. I see somebody driving erratically and they're usually holding a cell in their hand.

...and frequently, it's a cop!

 

[Brain357]

Hey - Joe - wanna know why I'm bitter? Because instead of going after handguns (the type of weapon involved in a super majority of all gun homicides annually) we got hit with an influx of "AR-15", "Assault rifle" propaganda by the folks on the left despite semi-auto rifles being responsible for under 25 deaths annually in the US. The media blew the significance way out of proportion.

100,000 die on prescription drugs, 7,000 die from handgun homicides, and we're focusing on a weapon that kills 25 people annually. Disingenuous the entire way through. It irks me to death.

Perhaps if "the left" (or whomever you want to call it) were to approach the situation a bit more logically you wouldn't have such a huge backlash right now.

What irks me is that psychoes like HOlmes and Lanza can get their hands on AR-15's and slaughter a lot of people. I'm not sure why this doesn't bother you, but I suspect you are compensating for "shortcomings' like most gun nuts.

If AR 15s kill 25 people annually, and handguns 7,000 (homicides), and you go after the AR 15 first, that irks me. Does not make a lot of sense.

It's disingenuous.

I think hi capacity magazines is really the thing to go after. There are lots and lots of examples of shooters being stopped when they reload.

 

[Jarlaxle]

[

Bullshit. The only reason you picked those countries is because they have low murder rates. Sorry, there's just no getting around that over 100 countries have higher murder rates than the US despite their ban on firearms...and plenty of them are like us. Further, you over look that countries like England and Australia have much higher violent crime and rape rates than the US...but they're just ratholes too, eh?

Guy, you realized that I listed the UNITED KINGDOM, which England is part of, right?

United Kingdom- Which includes Scotland, Wales, England and Northern freakin' Ireland, -

Total number of murders - 653, of which 38 were with guns.

Okay, now let's look at Australia. Australia had 188 murders, of which 25 were committed with guns.

NOw, I don't care about rapes or assaults, because you realy can fudge those numbers. Hell, I used to do it all the time when I was on the right. (See, that's the problem, I know all your guys tricks.)

Murder is a nice, hard, unambigous statistic. And guess what. Other industrialized democracies ban guns, they have less crime than we do, and they have less murder.

Guns don't make you any safer.

The lack of guns doesn't ether. Remove the guns and you still have murders. I don't think you want to end murder, just guns.

I suspect he DANCED WITH JOY when he heard of Lanza's massacre.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Bullshit. If you think you can overturn the 2nd amendment, you're even more delusional than you appear. Good luck asshole.

Second Amendment is about Militias. Done.

But Joe, the Supreme Court has ruled time and time again that it protects MORE than just a militia.

I mean, you can't deny the facts right??

It's never stopped him before...

 

[Jarlaxle]

How do they avoid tyranny? Is that an actual question?

Come on man.

Why do we need guns if they don't?

Are you operating under the false assumption that there are no guns in the UK?

BTW the UK has a much higher violent crime rate than we do and according to their procedure a death is not called a murder unless there is a conviction.

SERIOUSLY?!?! Well, that's one way to make numbers look better!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Are you operating under the false assumption that there are no guns in the UK?

BTW the UK has a much higher violent crime rate than we do and according to their procedure a death is not called a murder unless there is a conviction.

I always wonder - too - is that if you strip guns away from everyone (theoretically speaking of course), is the 'playing field' now equalized? I mean, what is to protect a single female living in a bad area (or just in general)?

Can a woman fight off a fully grown man with a knife? When a woman calls the cops what are the odds she will not have been raped - or worse - in the 10 minutes it takes for the authorities to arrive?

Is it easier for MEN to say (sure get rid of guns) because they know they will always have a one-up physically and can at least compete with any potential intruders?

Don't these women have neighbors? I certainly wouldn't sit back and let somebody be attacked. Other countries with strict gun laws have less violent crime.

No, THAT IS WRONG!

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Ummm, yeah, probably. Still, no excuse for making it easy for them and less excuse for the 80% of gun deaths which are people who brought a gun into the house to "protect" themselves.

Hey - Joe - wanna know why I'm bitter? Because instead of going after handguns (the type of weapon involved in a super majority of all gun homicides annually) we got hit with an influx of "AR-15", "Assault rifle" propaganda by the folks on the left despite semi-auto rifles being responsible for under 25 deaths annually in the US. The media blew the significance way out of proportion.

100,000 die on prescription drugs, 7,000 die from handgun homicides, and we're focusing on a weapon that kills 25 people annually. Disingenuous the entire way through. It irks me to death.

Perhaps if "the left" (or whomever you want to call it) were to approach the situation a bit more logically you wouldn't have such a huge backlash right now.

What irks me is that psychoes like HOlmes and Lanza can get their hands on AR-15's and slaughter a lot of people. I'm not sure why this doesn't bother you, but I suspect you are compensating for "shortcomings' like most gun nuts.

And Joe slowly but surely digresses to the usual cliché insults.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The American Revolution would have never been possible if the colonists weren't allowed to own guns. We'd have been crushed by the British. We would still be reporting to a king today.

I sure most people - gun controllers and gun holders - can agree with that fact, right?

Whole lot of flaws with that statement.

Flaw 1- Colonists didn't have that many guns to start with. In fact, when the war started, the continental congress had a very hard time getting guns. The influx of weapons that turned the tide was because Louis XVI was willing to bankrupt his country to get back at the Brits by supporting us.

Flaw 2- That is the Founding Slave Rapists lost, this would not have be a bad thing. YOu know what would have happened? We'd all be freaking Canadians. Which means we'd have sensible gun laws, universal health care, and slavery would have ended by royal decree instead of a pointless and bloody civil war. Can't see any of these things as bad, really.

You can be in Canada tomorrow, dickhead...if you like the idea so damned much, why do you stay in Shit-cago?

 

[JoeB131]

Why do we need guns if they don't?

Are you operating under the false assumption that there are no guns in the UK?

BTW the UK has a much higher violent crime rate than we do and according to their procedure a death is not called a murder unless there is a conviction.

SERIOUSLY?!?! Well, that's one way to make numbers look better!

No, not seriously. He read that on a gun nutter website and he believes it.

The ONLY time a murder is removed from the statistics if there is a finding of self-defense. Unsolved murders and murders where they fail to get a conviction are still counted.

 

[JoeB131]

[

You can be in Canada tomorrow, dickhead...if you like the idea so damned much, why do you stay in Shit-cago?

Because we can fix this country, right after we take you Bubba Rednecks off the board.

 

[freedombecki]

5 Justices found FOR Heller, 4 against. That tells me that this really is one septegenarian heart attacck away from a sensible interpretation.

An official ruling is a ruling. It trumps your opinion and my opinion on all counts in this democracy. Fortunately (for me) the ruling is consistent with my views..

SO you wingnuts are going to stop trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, then?

Didn't think so.

Scalia dies of a heart attack and is replaced by Lawrence Tribe. Game, Set Match, baby!

So you abortionists don't think bumping the abortion kill from 1.3 million per annum to 2.6 million is a big deal?

Laws of mercy, you're colder serial killers than I thought.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

[

You can be in Canada tomorrow, dickhead...if you like the idea so damned much, why do you stay in Shit-cago?

Because we can fix this country, right after we take you Bubba Rednecks off the board.

As far as the Second Amendment goes, ain't gonna happen Joey.
We will have our gun rights for the rest of your life, my life, and those that come after us.

So you can jump on these gun threads and piss and moan all you like, but what you think or what I think doesn't matter, because we are not going to try and take 300 million guns out of the hands of American citizens.
Ain't gonna happen Joey, so get used to it, or get your plane ticket.

 

[JoeB131]

[

As far as the Second Amendment goes, ain't gonna happen Joey.
We will have our gun rights for the rest of your life, my life, and those that come after us.

So you can jump on these gun threads and piss and moan all you like, but what you think or what I think doesn't matter, because we are not going to try and take 300 million guns out of the hands of American citizens.
Ain't gonna happen Joey, so get used to it, or get your plane ticket.

Guy, the day you all start shooting the people you disagree with is the day we are going to get your guns, all that much faster.