America's Gun Violence

1170171173175176268

Comments

  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882
    They finally caught that left-wing terrorist d-bag from Wisconsin. Glad he was not able to follow through with his hate plan.
    https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/04/14/trump-hating-machine-gun-stealing-left-wing-nut-job-arrested-wisconsin/
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 6,097
    PJPOWER said:

    They finally caught that left-wing terrorist d-bag from Wisconsin. Glad he was not able to follow through with his hate plan.
    https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/04/14/trump-hating-machine-gun-stealing-left-wing-nut-job-arrested-wisconsin/

    I'm thinking someone who posts in here may be the owner of the store "armageddon supplies".
  • mcgruff10mcgruff10 New JerseyPosts: 12,568
    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    PJPOWER said:

    CM189191 said:

    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Exactly. When you happen to agree with a Supreme Court decision it's the word of God. We'll ignore all the courts stance prior to Heller that said it didn't apply to the individual. For all those years, the courts were just wrong apparently.
    Apparently...and I fully see you guys leaning on a Supreme Court decision if, in the unlikely event, it were reversed.
    Let's be honest, at the end of the day, all these guns nuts are nothing but pawns, rubes & useful idiots. Telling people the government is coming to steal their guns drives voters to the polls to vote R. It's a wedge issue to get suckers riled up and vote for patriotism.

    If the GOP & NRA were serious about the gun rights of the individual, why don't they simply revise the Constitution for clarity?

    They already ignore the most important part anyways:
    The 1st amendment mentions nothing about the internet...are you sure it applies? What other amendments should we start revising? Gun manufacturers should actually encourage Democrat votes, great for business and as you implied, will never actually succeed in "stealing guns". The idiots are the crybabies that think America will ever actually be a "gun free zone".
    I mean, I had my reservations about the 18th. But it seems we got that one sorted out. The 13th and the 18th 19th were nice additions.

    Updating or revising the Constitution is not unpresidented.

    fun fact: did you know it took 202 years to ratify the 27th Amendment?
    ftfm
    lol. that makes more sense!!!
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,418
    PJPOWER said:

    They finally caught that left-wing terrorist d-bag from Wisconsin. Glad he was not able to follow through with his hate plan.
    https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/04/14/trump-hating-machine-gun-stealing-left-wing-nut-job-arrested-wisconsin/

    I guess it's all in how you spin it.

    http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/man-accused-in-gun-theft-and-sending-trump-anti-government-manifesto-arrested-after-manhunt

    I see that nowhere in the headline or the text of the article is the accused described as "left wing", and the National Post is a conservative-leaning newspaper.

    On what basis did you decide he was "left wing", other than the headline from your "bearingarms" site? Because he's anti-government? Unsung here is anti-government; is he left wing? Or is it because he's anti-religion?
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Lerxst1992Lerxst1992 Posts: 26
    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    From Heller...

    "the adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training"

    There's the validation by Heller for well regulated background checks and training. With demanding tests for required discipline and training before issuing ownership licenses.

    Next.

  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930

    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Exactly. When you happen to agree with a Supreme Court decision it's the word of God. We'll ignore all the courts stance prior to Heller that said it didn't apply to the individual. For all those years, the courts were just wrong apparently.
    Apparently...and I fully see you guys leaning on a Supreme Court decision if, in the unlikely event, it were reversed.
    My reaction would be "I think 2A applies to a militia, and the Supreme Court agrees". Not "I'm right and you're wrong and the Supreme Court says so". Subtle, but big difference.
    Heller says 2A applies to the individual. Thanks.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Um, what?!?!
  • Lerxst1992Lerxst1992 Posts: 26
    unsung said:

    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Exactly. When you happen to agree with a Supreme Court decision it's the word of God. We'll ignore all the courts stance prior to Heller that said it didn't apply to the individual. For all those years, the courts were just wrong apparently.
    Apparently...and I fully see you guys leaning on a Supreme Court decision if, in the unlikely event, it were reversed.
    My reaction would be "I think 2A applies to a militia, and the Supreme Court agrees". Not "I'm right and you're wrong and the Supreme Court says so". Subtle, but big difference.
    Heller says 2A applies to the individual. Thanks.

    A well regulated individual. To quote the, you know, um, Constitution.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882

    unsung said:

    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Exactly. When you happen to agree with a Supreme Court decision it's the word of God. We'll ignore all the courts stance prior to Heller that said it didn't apply to the individual. For all those years, the courts were just wrong apparently.
    Apparently...and I fully see you guys leaning on a Supreme Court decision if, in the unlikely event, it were reversed.
    My reaction would be "I think 2A applies to a militia, and the Supreme Court agrees". Not "I'm right and you're wrong and the Supreme Court says so". Subtle, but big difference.
    Heller says 2A applies to the individual. Thanks.

    A well regulated individual. To quote the, you know, um, Constitution.
    I, for one, will never use my vote for someone that interprets it the way you do.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,418
    unsung said:

    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Exactly. When you happen to agree with a Supreme Court decision it's the word of God. We'll ignore all the courts stance prior to Heller that said it didn't apply to the individual. For all those years, the courts were just wrong apparently.
    Apparently...and I fully see you guys leaning on a Supreme Court decision if, in the unlikely event, it were reversed.
    My reaction would be "I think 2A applies to a militia, and the Supreme Court agrees". Not "I'm right and you're wrong and the Supreme Court says so". Subtle, but big difference.
    Heller says 2A applies to the individual. Thanks.
    I think you missed the fact that this was a response to a hypothetical situation; thus, the term "reaction".
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Lerxst1992Lerxst1992 Posts: 26
    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    dudeman said:

    dudeman said:

    So, would you recommend that those people who are distrustful of police purchase guns so that they can protect themselves?

    I don't recommend purchasing a gun for protection, but the logic of many of pro-gun folks says yes, people should buy guns to protect themselves from any perceived threat.
    For the life of me... I can't understand how people do not understand that the risk of getting killed or injured by a gun increases dramatically after a gun is introduced to a home.

    Home invaders are a threat, but nowhere near the threat the gun itself is.
    So, you think that people should be able to own guns for self defense but those who choose to exercise their right are idiots?
    No. I don't think that.

    I'm saying having a gun in your house exponentially increases your odds of a firearm related accident for you or anyone in your house.
    I always found this to be an interesting argument. Having a child in the house increases the odds of a child peeing on the floor. Having drain cleaner in the house increases the odds of someone poisoning themselves with drain cleaner. Having sleeping pills in the house increases the odds of a sleeping pill overdose. How do you decrease the odds? Lock shit up! Do not leave your drain cleaner accessible to children, etc. The only way a gun will harm someone unintentionally is due to negligence, as with the sleeping pills, drain cleaner, etc.
    I would also argue that having a firearm in the house exponentially increases the odds of your own survival if drugged up armed intruders break in while you are there. Or a few teens armed with knives and brass knuckles as in a recent incident.
    Who actually has the capability to secure their guns from children yet still have them quickly accessible for protection from a home invasion.
    NOBODY!
    Bullshit, there are plenty of quickly accessible biometric or quick release combination safe options out there for just this thing.
    https://thegunsafes.net/biometric-gun-safe-reviews/
    Yeah, there are.
    Too bad NOBODY has one.
    Maybe you do. Maybe.

    Probably more than 90% of guy owners don't. You know it in your heart even if you won't admit it.
    You are completely full of shit! Most people I know that have children have something similar. You are totally uneducated on the subject. Go back to a topic you have a glimmer of intelligence on...seriously. I have actually received and given these mini-vaults many times as Christmas presents...I'm from Texas and I know a hell of a lot of gun owners that use these, if for nothing else so they do not get their firearms stolen.
    Bullshit. I don't know a single gun owner who has anything but a plain old gun safe.
    You want everyone to believe a fantasy, people aren't gonna buy it.
    So says the person spouting the gun control fallacies.
    What fallacies?
    I live in the middle where common sense shows it's face, not some fantasy land where there are tens of millions of biometric safes in use and kids don't kill themselves every week with their parents' guns.
    There are always going to be responsible and irresponsible people out there, whether they are doing drugs, playing with guns, joy riding in cars, etc. That does not discount the fact that there are also a ton of responsible people out there that should not have there right to protect themselves (from the irresponsible) with a firearm trampled on.
    So can we have as many rules with guns as we do with cars?
    No, no, no, because, um, the Constitution.
    You mean the second amendment, which calls for a "well regulated Militia."
    Heller validated it applies to the individual. Next.
    Well if ONE person says so...
    Exactly. When you happen to agree with a Supreme Court decision it's the word of God. We'll ignore all the courts stance prior to Heller that said it didn't apply to the individual. For all those years, the courts were just wrong apparently.
    Apparently...and I fully see you guys leaning on a Supreme Court decision if, in the unlikely event, it were reversed.
    My reaction would be "I think 2A applies to a militia, and the Supreme Court agrees". Not "I'm right and you're wrong and the Supreme Court says so". Subtle, but big difference.
    Heller says 2A applies to the individual. Thanks.

    A well regulated individual. To quote the, you know, um, Constitution.
    I, for one, will never use my vote for someone that interprets it the way you do.
    ^probably the only reason half of US voters use their vote to shoot themselves in the foot.
    ....

    No need to interpret the Constitution. "Well regulated" is right there in English, and Scalia says it means gun owners should be competent and properly trained.

    Love the "..." in the pic posted earlier. Let's just delete the part of 2a we don't like.
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,264
    This idiot probably thought he was standing his ground. Dumb racist trash just looking for an excuse to 'defend themselves'. Who wants to live in a world like this?
    guy pulls real gun on teenagers playing with Nerf guns
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 8,720
    #1) Kids do stupid things and it's sad that they are often disrespectful to others around them...not sure how old these kids were and not sure if they are just good goods being kids or they are generally disrespectful idiots...but

    #2) None of that justifies some idiot pulling out a gun and escalating the situation to that level. That's some crazy right there.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,264
    unsung said:
    Quote the criminal and mental health background. Wonder how he was able to get his hands on guns so easily. Probably bought them at a 'gun show'.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882
    unsung said:
    Racist piece of shit. Maybe he could share a cell with Dylann Roof.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882
    edited April 19

    unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    What a waste, use him and the likes for scientific research/drug trials. In my opinion, people that commit these acts have forfeited any kind of human rights awarded to the rest of society.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,264

    unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    His mental illness history might be one reason he avoids the death penalty.

    This is CA, not TX

    What is it with conservatives wanting to kill someone every chance they get?
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • CM189191 said:

    unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    His mental illness history might be one reason he avoids the death penalty.

    This is CA, not TX

    What is it with conservatives wanting to kill someone every chance they get?
    You'd have to talk to a conservative about that. I'm not sure?

    What's it with liberals rushing to the defence of mass murderers every chance they get?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,418

    unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    I could be wrong, but my memory from the discussion on the DP thread was that you said you were in favour of the DP in limited circumstances, such as child abduction and murder, sex crimes, particularly heinous murders, etc. The victims in this case seem almost randomly chosen. Why does it fit your criteria?
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    I could be wrong, but my memory from the discussion on the DP thread was that you said you were in favour of the DP in limited circumstances, such as child abduction and murder, sex crimes, particularly heinous murders, etc. The victims in this case seem almost randomly chosen. Why does it fit your criteria?
    Mass murder and serial murder fit my criteria as well.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882
    edited April 19

    unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    I could be wrong, but my memory from the discussion on the DP thread was that you said you were in favour of the DP in limited circumstances, such as child abduction and murder, sex crimes, particularly heinous murders, etc. The victims in this case seem almost randomly chosen. Why does it fit your criteria?
    Randomly selected individuals of a specific race. It was a racially motivated hate crime with religious undertones (screaming praises to Allah while being taken down). It was similar to mushroom head Roof's actions.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,522
    unsung said:
    You don't have a history of posting about incidents of gun violence in this thread, I wonder why you changed course...
    Hmmmmm
    :how_interesting:
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930
    rgambs said:

    unsung said:
    You don't have a history of posting about incidents of gun violence in this thread, I wonder why you changed course...
    Hmmmmm
    :how_interesting:
    Probably the same reason you were silent on it. Hmmmmm
  • PJPOWER said:

    unsung said:
    Death Penalty.

    Why not? Let him meet his maker.
    I could be wrong, but my memory from the discussion on the DP thread was that you said you were in favour of the DP in limited circumstances, such as child abduction and murder, sex crimes, particularly heinous murders, etc. The victims in this case seem almost randomly chosen. Why does it fit your criteria?
    Randomly selected individuals of a specific race. It was a racially motivated hate crime with religious undertones (screaming praises to Allah while being taken down). It was similar to mushroom head Roof's actions.
    It is gross... but not as gross as Mushroom Head's obscenity in my mind (if we can even compare such offences- to the victims... there's no difference).

    Bottom line: innocent people have been erased from the earth through sheer maliciousness and evil. They aren't here to voice how displeased they are about that, but others are. So... as a voice for them... the death penalty seems reasonable. It's a much more fair fate than they endured given this shithead made his own bed to lie in compared to his victims who were randomly executed while doing normal human things.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,522
    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:
    You don't have a history of posting about incidents of gun violence in this thread, I wonder why you changed course...
    Hmmmmm
    :how_interesting:
    Probably the same reason you were silent on it. Hmmmmm
    Nope, I hadn't heard about it yet. Good on you for admitting it was the race of the shooter that caused you to single it out.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930
    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:
    You don't have a history of posting about incidents of gun violence in this thread, I wonder why you changed course...
    Hmmmmm
    :how_interesting:
    Probably the same reason you were silent on it. Hmmmmm
    Nope, I hadn't heard about it yet. Good on you for admitting it was the race of the shooter that caused you to single it out.
    Sorry bud, it was the thing he said. Sorry about wrecking your agenda.
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 6,097
    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:
    You don't have a history of posting about incidents of gun violence in this thread, I wonder why you changed course...
    Hmmmmm
    :how_interesting:
    Probably the same reason you were silent on it. Hmmmmm
    Nope, I hadn't heard about it yet. Good on you for admitting it was the race of the shooter that caused you to single it out.
    Sorry bud, it was the thing he said. Sorry about wrecking your agenda.
    And what he said would scare someone who is concerned about white genocide.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930
    Or anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
Sign In or Register to comment.