Why does anybody think concealed carry is a good idea?

[hadit]

Does the woman who crashed her car and kills her kids need a car?

Yes or no.

A car is for driving places. You don't take a car into a Wal-Mart, you might kill someone, and you don't let the kids touch the parts of it that really matter. Now, what is a gun for?

She already killed her kids because she drove a car she didn't need. She could have walked or used public transportation. She had other options but chose to drive a car she didn't need. And now her children are dead. Ban all cars. They are not needed.

Your dishonesty is noted. I'll help you out though, a gun, especially a handgun, is for killing people. Why, exactly, would you need to kill someone in a Wal-Mart? Answer, you wouldn't and therefore the gun should never have been in there in the first place.

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial.

The location, in this case, is very material. No one needs a gun in a Wal-Mart, no one.

Then make sure you don't carry one in there. I will guarantee you this. If you've been in a Wal-Mart in the States, you've almost certainly been surrounded by guns and never even knew it. Certainly not harmed by them.

 

[9thIDdoc]

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial

Just as it would have been irresponsible to take a child where there are pedophiles and kidnappers with a means to protect it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A car is for driving places. You don't take a car into a Wal-Mart, you might kill someone, and you don't let the kids touch the parts of it that really matter. Now, what is a gun for?

She already killed her kids because she drove a car she didn't need. She could have walked or used public transportation. She had other options but chose to drive a car she didn't need. And now her children are dead. Ban all cars. They are not needed.

Your dishonesty is noted. I'll help you out though, a gun, especially a handgun, is for killing people. Why, exactly, would you need to kill someone in a Wal-Mart? Answer, you wouldn't and therefore the gun should never have been in there in the first place.

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial.

The location, in this case, is very material. No one needs a gun in a Wal-Mart, no one.

Then make sure you don't carry one in there. I will guarantee you this. If you've been in a Wal-Mart in the States, you've almost certainly been surrounded by guns and never even knew it. Certainly not harmed by them.

There are guns all around me often enough, and they are entirely unnecessary.

No normal citizen has any need for a gun, especially a handgun.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

That's exactly the reason I have guns, to kill someone who might try to harm my people.

 

[hadit]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

Need has nothing to do with it, as I keep saying. We don't "need" to jump out of perfectly functioning airplanes, we don't "need" to have cars that can double the speed limit, we don't "need" to sit in Mom's basement and get high all day, we don't "need" to go to a bar and drink alcohol on a weekend. There are a lot of things we don't "need", but we do them anyway. The point is, are we going to remain free to make our own choices and take the consequences of them, or are we going to surrender those freedoms to nanny minded dimbulbs who think they know better? You've already staked out your position. I think the next step is for an unelected bureaucrat to decide you don't "need" unfettered access to the internet and decide for you what sites are safe to visit and what's safe to say.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's correct. It's a nation of morons, like this dead woman.

Sounds like a classic case of envy. When did you discover that you were incapable of leading your own life safely?

When I discovered that I didn't have time to test all the drugs that I might need by myself and that capitalism would be more than happy to sell me snake oil at any price I was willing to pay.

Gee, that's too bad. I was smart enough to know what a gun does and how to avoid having it done to me long before I became an adult. Heck, I even knew smoking was bad for you before it was cool. Sounds like you need to hang around with some smarter people.

They don't come any smarter than I am which is why I have the government do for me what I don't have time to do while I do what pays for them to do what they do. It's a very beneficial relationship. They check out the drugs for me and I send them checks. They keep the planes from crashing into each other and I send them checks. They keep the fire trucks in working order and the water safe to drink and I send them checks. See how that works now? It's very smart.

Interesting that you cannot distinguish between prescription drug safety and common sense gun safety. Those who trade freedom for security deserve neither.

The example is exactly the same. Smart governments don't let their people have what is likely to kill them. When a drug kills ten people it gets pulled from the market as quickly as possible. When guns kill 32,000 a year, you guys shrug it off because you like guns, regardless of the death and destruction they cause.

 

[hadit]

She already killed her kids because she drove a car she didn't need. She could have walked or used public transportation. She had other options but chose to drive a car she didn't need. And now her children are dead. Ban all cars. They are not needed.

Your dishonesty is noted. I'll help you out though, a gun, especially a handgun, is for killing people. Why, exactly, would you need to kill someone in a Wal-Mart? Answer, you wouldn't and therefore the gun should never have been in there in the first place.

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial.

The location, in this case, is very material. No one needs a gun in a Wal-Mart, no one.

Then make sure you don't carry one in there. I will guarantee you this. If you've been in a Wal-Mart in the States, you've almost certainly been surrounded by guns and never even knew it. Certainly not harmed by them.

There are guns all around me often enough, and they are entirely unnecessary.

No normal citizen has any need for a gun, especially a handgun.

And none of them have harmed you in any way, have they?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

That's exactly the reason I have guns, to kill someone who might try to harm my people.

And who is going to try and harm you in a Wal-Mart? Oh right, no one.

You are John Wayne, in flowered panties.

 

[hadit]

Sounds like a classic case of envy. When did you discover that you were incapable of leading your own life safely?

When I discovered that I didn't have time to test all the drugs that I might need by myself and that capitalism would be more than happy to sell me snake oil at any price I was willing to pay.

Gee, that's too bad. I was smart enough to know what a gun does and how to avoid having it done to me long before I became an adult. Heck, I even knew smoking was bad for you before it was cool. Sounds like you need to hang around with some smarter people.

They don't come any smarter than I am which is why I have the government do for me what I don't have time to do while I do what pays for them to do what they do. It's a very beneficial relationship. They check out the drugs for me and I send them checks. They keep the planes from crashing into each other and I send them checks. They keep the fire trucks in working order and the water safe to drink and I send them checks. See how that works now? It's very smart.

Interesting that you cannot distinguish between prescription drug safety and common sense gun safety. Those who trade freedom for security deserve neither.

The example is exactly the same. Smart governments don't let their people have what is likely to kill them. When a drug kills ten people it gets pulled from the market as quickly as possible. When guns kill 32,000 a year, you guys shrug it off because you like guns, regardless of the death and destruction they cause.

Therein lies the difference, and where the wheels fall off your tricycle. When I buy a drug, I do it based on the assurance that it will help, not harm me. When I buy a gun, I do it knowing full well what will happen if I point it at someone and pull the trigger.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Your dishonesty is noted. I'll help you out though, a gun, especially a handgun, is for killing people. Why, exactly, would you need to kill someone in a Wal-Mart? Answer, you wouldn't and therefore the gun should never have been in there in the first place.

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial.

The location, in this case, is very material. No one needs a gun in a Wal-Mart, no one.

Then make sure you don't carry one in there. I will guarantee you this. If you've been in a Wal-Mart in the States, you've almost certainly been surrounded by guns and never even knew it. Certainly not harmed by them.

There are guns all around me often enough, and they are entirely unnecessary.

No normal citizen has any need for a gun, especially a handgun.

And none of them have harmed you in any way, have they?

Not yet but I can't say the same for 32,000 other Americans. Year after year after year. Your argument is subjective, which means it isn't an argument.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

Need has nothing to do with it, as I keep saying. We don't "need" to jump out of perfectly functioning airplanes, we don't "need" to have cars that can double the speed limit, we don't "need" to sit in Mom's basement and get high all day, we don't "need" to go to a bar and drink alcohol on a weekend. There are a lot of things we don't "need", but we do them anyway. The point is, are we going to remain free to make our own choices and take the consequences of them, or are we going to surrender those freedoms to nanny minded dimbulbs who think they know better? You've already staked out your position. I think the next step is for an unelected bureaucrat to decide you don't "need" unfettered access to the internet and decide for you what sites are safe to visit and what's safe to say.

The nannies do know better. That's what we pay them for.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

That's exactly the reason I have guns, to kill someone who might try to harm my people.

And who is going to try and harm you in a Wal-Mart? Oh right, no one.

You are John Wayne, in flowered panties.

Can you personally vouch for everyone in wal-mart, every second of every day? I can see you've never been to wal-mart in Opa Locka, Florida.

Some asshole killed a bunch of people at McDonald's years ago. Good thing he was the only one with a gun. Who needs a gun at McDonald's?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

That's exactly the reason I have guns, to kill someone who might try to harm my people.

And who is going to try and harm you in a Wal-Mart? Oh right, no one.

You are John Wayne, in flowered panties.

Can you personally vouch for everyone in wal-mart, every second of every day? I can see you've never been to wal-mart in Opa Locka, Florida.

Some asshole killed a bunch of people at McDonald's years ago. Good thing he was the only one with a gun. Who needs a gun at McDonald's?

No one, obviously.

And in what cases would you need to kill someone at a Wal-Mart? When they tried to grab the last package of 20 pairs of socks for $3.87?

 

[Carib Gyal]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

That's exactly the reason I have guns, to kill someone who might try to harm my people.

And who is going to try and harm you in a Wal-Mart? Oh right, no one.

You are John Wayne, in flowered panties.

Can you personally vouch for everyone in wal-mart, every second of every day? I can see you've never been to wal-mart in Opa Locka, Florida.

Some asshole killed a bunch of people at McDonald's years ago. Good thing he was the only one with a gun. Who needs a gun at McDonald's?

No one, obviously.

And in what cases would you need to kill someone at a Wal-Mart? When they tried to grab the last package of 20 pairs of socks for $3.87?

Not no one. One one.

Same reason. Some insane asshole is killing people. It's called self-defense. I'll always have a gun to defend me and mine.

 

[hadit]

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial.

The location, in this case, is very material. No one needs a gun in a Wal-Mart, no one.

Then make sure you don't carry one in there. I will guarantee you this. If you've been in a Wal-Mart in the States, you've almost certainly been surrounded by guns and never even knew it. Certainly not harmed by them.

There are guns all around me often enough, and they are entirely unnecessary.

No normal citizen has any need for a gun, especially a handgun.

And none of them have harmed you in any way, have they?

Not yet but I can't say the same for 32,000 other Americans. Year after year after year. Your argument is subjective, which means it isn't an argument.

Most of those 32,000 would be dead by other means, as they were targets of gang activity, drug deals, etc. and not accidental victims, so be a bit more accurate instead of using artificially inflammatory numbers. The point remains that you are fearing something the MIGHT happen, not something that has happened. Let's use the same logic pro-aborts use. If you don't want a gun, don't buy one.

 

[hadit]

Why does the left act like everyone is too stupid to handle guns?

Because most people are, and even the best get dead by their own guns often enough, and no one needs anything like the number of guns we have. You people like guns. The problem is, they kill people and you don't need them.

Need has nothing to do with it, as I keep saying. We don't "need" to jump out of perfectly functioning airplanes, we don't "need" to have cars that can double the speed limit, we don't "need" to sit in Mom's basement and get high all day, we don't "need" to go to a bar and drink alcohol on a weekend. There are a lot of things we don't "need", but we do them anyway. The point is, are we going to remain free to make our own choices and take the consequences of them, or are we going to surrender those freedoms to nanny minded dimbulbs who think they know better? You've already staked out your position. I think the next step is for an unelected bureaucrat to decide you don't "need" unfettered access to the internet and decide for you what sites are safe to visit and what's safe to say.

The nannies do know better. That's what we pay them for.

That, dear readers, is what a "useful idiot" sounds like.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Your argument is ridiculous.

And yet you keep arguing with him anyway.

Now who's ridiculous?

 

[Andylusion]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

It works for the thugs...it works for me.

Thugs of a feather concealed carry together.

And yet I don't see the crime reports in my town, which are publicized, showing hundreds of "conceal and carry thugs". That dude who was attacked and mulled by dozens of bikers in New York, I think he would have been better off, if he had a conceal and carry.

 

[WinterBorn]

She was irresponsible to leave a weapon that could be fired by a little child within his reach. The location is immaterial.

The location, in this case, is very material. No one needs a gun in a Wal-Mart, no one.

Then make sure you don't carry one in there. I will guarantee you this. If you've been in a Wal-Mart in the States, you've almost certainly been surrounded by guns and never even knew it. Certainly not harmed by them.

There are guns all around me often enough, and they are entirely unnecessary.

No normal citizen has any need for a gun, especially a handgun.

And none of them have harmed you in any way, have they?

Not yet but I can't say the same for 32,000 other Americans. Year after year after year. Your argument is subjective, which means it isn't an argument.

Arguing that 20,000 suicides would not have happened if they hadn't had a gun is an argument without a factual basis.

The basic facts are still simple. +/-9,000 gun murders, 700-800 accidental shooting deaths, and 65 million legal gun owners. Less than 1/10th of 1% of legal gun owners are involved in a murder or accidental shooting death.