You are required by law to own a gun

[candycorn]

you think you know better than everyone else

not true.

Funny you're the one making predictions of a trend on a single incident seems to me you think you know something

you don't

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

does every bat have that same potential

every car

every knife

every single piece of rope

how about electrical cords do they have the potential of being a deadly weapon

And an effective range of how far you can throw them... But since you brought it up; more cars = more car wrecks. Insurance rates for teens (less experienced drivers) are almost always higher than it is for more experienced drivers. Apparently the Insurance companies are making predictions too...

nice dodge asshole

Make a better argument next time.

 

[jon_berzerk]

one of my cars has been thrown over 180,000 miles btw

 

[jon_berzerk]

Funny you're the one making predictions of a trend on a single incident seems to me you think you know something

you don't

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

does every bat have that same potential

every car

every knife

every single piece of rope

how about electrical cords do they have the potential of being a deadly weapon

And an effective range of how far you can throw them... But since you brought it up; more cars = more car wrecks. Insurance rates for teens (less experienced drivers) are almost always higher than it is for more experienced drivers. Apparently the Insurance companies are making predictions too...

nice dodge asshole

Make a better argument next time.

mine is sound yours is not

 

[candycorn]

you think you know better than everyone else

not true.

Funny you're the one making predictions of a trend on a single incident seems to me you think you know something

you don't

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

The numbers prove you wrong as gun ownership has risen murders and violent crimes have both decreased

Sorry

And what has happened to the prison population....

Who the fuck cares?

Indeed...

 

[jon_berzerk]

you think you know better than everyone else

not true.

Funny you're the one making predictions of a trend on a single incident seems to me you think you know something

you don't

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

The numbers prove you wrong as gun ownership has risen murders and violent crimes have both decreased

Sorry

And what has happened to the prison population....

Who the fuck cares?

made no sense

--LOL

 

[candycorn]

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

does every bat have that same potential

every car

every knife

every single piece of rope

how about electrical cords do they have the potential of being a deadly weapon

And an effective range of how far you can throw them... But since you brought it up; more cars = more car wrecks. Insurance rates for teens (less experienced drivers) are almost always higher than it is for more experienced drivers. Apparently the Insurance companies are making predictions too...

nice dodge asshole

Make a better argument next time.

mine is sound yours is not

Yet here you are arguing with me.

 

[jon_berzerk]

does every bat have that same potential

every car

every knife

every single piece of rope

how about electrical cords do they have the potential of being a deadly weapon

And an effective range of how far you can throw them... But since you brought it up; more cars = more car wrecks. Insurance rates for teens (less experienced drivers) are almost always higher than it is for more experienced drivers. Apparently the Insurance companies are making predictions too...

nice dodge asshole

Make a better argument next time.

mine is sound yours is not

Yet here you are arguing with me.

you consider this arguing --LOL

simply pointing out how unsound your position is

 

[M14 Shooter]

The only way you would endanger anyone with a firearm is if you chose to endanger them

I and many people I know own guns and have for decades and none of them have ever endangered anyone with their firearms

That you know of. Which is great.

It hasn't happened at all

That you know of.

Just out of curiosity...the lines you see in the morning outside of Dicks Sporting Goods to buy weaponry...do you think that those 30-50 people are all as responsible as you and your decades long friends?

In a few years (if not months), we're going to have shootouts on the freeways from people cutting each other off in traffic; gunfights over parking spaces and probably some posters on message boards will try to track down others whom they disagree with. I'm hoping that e-commerce eliminates the Black Friday fights because there will likely be a massacre over a Samsung TV next year.

Then someone who is a liberal will suggest that we teach conflict resolution (without guns) in the gun safety courses. And there will be lot of folks who will say that it infringes on their 2nd Amendment.

Couldn't say and gun ownership has been on the rise while violent crime has been on the decline

So if you can predict all these highway shootouts then you must know the winning numbers for the next power ball so why don't you win the lottery and then you can hire all the armed guards you need to protect you from the other people with guns that scare you so mich

So it begins...

When did you start hoping for the deaths of innocent people, so that you might more easily push your mindless agenda?
Were you born a sociopath, or did you develop your affliction later on in life?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yeah a real trend

Hope not.

It's not

you think you know better than everyone else

not true.

Funny you're the one making predictions of a trend on a single incident seems to me you think you know something

you don't

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

Reality says otherwise.
1993-2014
Compare the numbers.

 

[hadit]

Actually, I am kind of surprised that the anti-gun crowd doesn't push a lot harder for non-lethal means of defense. The usual response is not, "hey, let's make it a lot easier for women to get and carry a device that will temporarily disable a would-be rapist, allowing her time to get away". It's usually something like, "pull out your phone and hope you can dial an emergency number before a would-be rapist takes it away from you and rapes you", or "when he has you on the ground, piss on yourself. It might make him leave you alone".

It sounds an awful lot like they are more worried about getting rid of "icky" guns than they are about protecting the more vulnerable among us.

 

[2aguy]

Yeah a real trend

Hope not.

It's not

you think you know better than everyone else

not true.

Funny you're the one making predictions of a trend on a single incident seems to me you think you know something

you don't

We both do. You put a deadly weapon (which every gun has the potential of being) into more hands, and you'll have more deaths. Sorry.

Wrong….we now have 357 million guns in private hands and over 13 million guns carried by law abiding Americans….and our gun murder rate has gone down, not up…fact. Our gun suicide rate has gone down, not up….fact. Our accidental gun death rate has gone down, not up…fact.

You are wrong.

 

[2aguy]

Actually, I am kind of surprised that the anti-gun crowd doesn't push a lot harder for non-lethal means of defense. The usual response is not, "hey, let's make it a lot easier for women to get and carry a device that will temporarily disable a would-be rapist, allowing her time to get away". It's usually something like, "pull out your phone and hope you can dial an emergency number before a would-be rapist takes it away from you and rapes you", or "when he has you on the ground, piss on yourself. It might make him leave you alone".

It sounds an awful lot like they are more worried about getting rid of "icky" guns than they are about protecting the more vulnerable among us.

It doesn't just sound like it, that is exactly their focus…..they could care less about crime victims…..ask them what they would prefer, a victim, or a victim who stops the attack with a gun……..?

 

[hadit]

Actually, I am kind of surprised that the anti-gun crowd doesn't push a lot harder for non-lethal means of defense. The usual response is not, "hey, let's make it a lot easier for women to get and carry a device that will temporarily disable a would-be rapist, allowing her time to get away". It's usually something like, "pull out your phone and hope you can dial an emergency number before a would-be rapist takes it away from you and rapes you", or "when he has you on the ground, piss on yourself. It might make him leave you alone".

It sounds an awful lot like they are more worried about getting rid of "icky" guns than they are about protecting the more vulnerable among us.

It doesn't just sound like it, that is exactly their focus…..they could care less about crime victims…..ask them what they would prefer, a victim, or a victim who stops the attack with a gun……..?

Which leads to the current push for "smart" guns. A thought experiment should prove enlightening. If the technology was developed that ensured a smart gun would immediately fire when its owner, and only its owner, desired it to fire, would the anti-gun crowd be appeased? Absolutely not, and that's because they are more into social engineering than they are true safety. The same thing has happened with tobacco. When I was a child, you could buy cigarettes from a vending machine and light up pretty much wherever you wanted to. I was exposed to second-hand smoke on at least a weekly basis. Now, I don't come into contact with tobacco smoke more than a handful of times a year. Is the anti-tobacco crowd happy now that contact with tobacco smoke is so rare? Of course not. Another thought experiment. Carry an UNLIT cigarette in your hand as you walk in a public place, like a shopping mall and see what happens. You're not smoking, you're not causing anyone to come in contact with tobacco smoke that doesn't want to, but I can guarantee you won't get very far without somebody having a hissy fit because they see you holding a cigarette. Social engineers always do it "for the children", or "for your own good", but at heart they just want to control.

 

[2aguy]

Actually, I am kind of surprised that the anti-gun crowd doesn't push a lot harder for non-lethal means of defense. The usual response is not, "hey, let's make it a lot easier for women to get and carry a device that will temporarily disable a would-be rapist, allowing her time to get away". It's usually something like, "pull out your phone and hope you can dial an emergency number before a would-be rapist takes it away from you and rapes you", or "when he has you on the ground, piss on yourself. It might make him leave you alone".

It sounds an awful lot like they are more worried about getting rid of "icky" guns than they are about protecting the more vulnerable among us.

It doesn't just sound like it, that is exactly their focus…..they could care less about crime victims…..ask them what they would prefer, a victim, or a victim who stops the attack with a gun……..?

Which leads to the current push for "smart" guns. A thought experiment should prove enlightening. If the technology was developed that ensured a smart gun would immediately fire when its owner, and only its owner, desired it to fire, would the anti-gun crowd be appeased? Absolutely not, and that's because they are more into social engineering than they are true safety. The same thing has happened with tobacco. When I was a child, you could buy cigarettes from a vending machine and light up pretty much wherever you wanted to. I was exposed to second-hand smoke on at least a weekly basis. Now, I don't come into contact with tobacco smoke more than a handful of times a year. Is the anti-tobacco crowd happy now that contact with tobacco smoke is so rare? Of course not. Another thought experiment. Carry an UNLIT cigarette in your hand as you walk in a public place, like a shopping mall and see what happens. You're not smoking, you're not causing anyone to come in contact with tobacco smoke that doesn't want to, but I can guarantee you won't get very far without somebody having a hissy fit because they see you holding a cigarette. Social engineers always do it "for the children", or "for your own good", but at heart they just want to control.

Look at e-cigarrettes...they don't even emit real smoke....and the anti smokers still want to get rid of them...........