President Obama should set an example

blackredyellow

unsung wrote:

Sacha and Malia are worth no more than any of your children.

C'mon...

They are not worth anymore to me than my children, but you know damn well that they are more at risk than mine, and it would have incredible geopolitical consequences if God forbid something were to happen to them.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

unsung wrote:

Sacha and Malia are worth no more than any of your children.

correct.

but they are at 1 million times more risk.

pandora

unsung wrote:

In related news the city with the strictest gun laws in the nation, Chicago, just had its 500th murder last night.

The anti gunners ignored this post ...

Yeah more laws isn't going to do it.

gimmesometruth27

pandora wrote:

unsung wrote:

In related news the city with the strictest gun laws in the nation, Chicago, just had its 500th murder last night.

The anti gunners ignored this post ...

Yeah more laws isn't going to do it.

arm everyone. because clearly that is the answer....

vant0037

unsung wrote:

In related news the city with the strictest gun laws in the nation, Chicago, just had its 500th murder last night.

What are the numbers on how many of those murders were gun murders? My guess: a large majority. And what are the stats on how many of those guns were illegal? My guess: not as many as you think. If you can provide those numbers, you might have an argument, but no one on the "gun control sucks" side of things can ever seem to do that...

Hugh Freaking Dillon

pandora wrote:

unsung wrote:

In related news the city with the strictest gun laws in the nation, Chicago, just had its 500th murder last night.

The anti gunners ignored this post ...

Yeah more laws isn't going to do it.

it works everywhere else in the world. oh yeah, must be the video games that is doing it. because only americans play those.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

pandora wrote:

unsung wrote:

In related news the city with the strictest gun laws in the nation, Chicago, just had its 500th murder last night.

The anti gunners ignored this post ...

Yeah more laws isn't going to do it.

it works everywhere else in the world. oh yeah, must be the video games that is doing it. because only americans play those.

Only Americans have drug dealers, illegal arms dealers, pimps and other bad guys too (not to mention the mentally ill).

gimmesometruth27

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Only Americans have drug dealers, illegal arms dealers, pimps and other bad guys too (not to mention the mentally ill).

hey wait a minute, we are all mentally ill here....especially if we are counting narcissism

unsung

vant0037 wrote:

unsung wrote:

In related news the city with the strictest gun laws in the nation, Chicago, just had its 500th murder last night.

What are the numbers on how many of those murders were gun murders? My guess: a large majority. And what are the stats on how many of those guns were illegal? My guess: not as many as you think. If you can provide those numbers, you might have an argument, but no one on the "gun control sucks" side of things can ever seem to do that...

Well, if there was a gun ban I'd say it would be safe to assume that the guns were obtained illegally. Odds would be on your side.

unsung

No, I'm not seriously suggesting the President or poor little Malia have to suffer through life unarmed and unable to defend themselves or have someone provide it for them. I'd just ask for the same Right, that I already have, not to be taken away from me. Anything else is hypocrisy.

gimmesometruth27

unsung wrote:

No, I'm not seriously suggesting the President or poor little Malia have to suffer through life unarmed and unable to defend themselves or have someone provide it for them. I'd just ask for the same Right, that I already have, not to be taken away from me. Anything else is hypocrisy.

sounds like you are having a "poor me" couple of weeks ever since a psycho decided to shoot up a school and we have been talking about gun control.

and please indulge me and explain how curbing combat worthy machine guns, high capacity clips/magazines, instituting more stringent background checks is taking away any right of yours.

or is it the whole ron paul mentality that the government is not allowed to change the bill of rights or else it is an affront to freedom and an affront to jesus or something?

unsung

Gimme,

Well I do feel that taking things away from the law abiding is more of a knee-jerk reaction and is nothing more than doing something just to do something.

And really, it has been said hundreds if not thousands of times, guns don't shoot themselves. My guns have never injured anything. And also really, limit me to 10 rounds at a time? Another knee-jerk reaction. The excuse you lefties like to use is that the crazed coward would not have been able to kill x amount of people had they had to stop to reload. But when anyone attempts to claim that concealed permit holders could have stopped some of these crimes you guys scream that more guns is not the answer. FYI there have been many instances where the offender was stopped by a concealed weapons holder.

So let's stop and use your logic for a second.

Let's say that your high-cap magazine (very few guns use clips) ban goes into effect. Previously mentioned crazed killer that somehow is not breaking enough laws to begin with is actually following the one that you guys love to go on and on about and only has a ten round magazine loaded up. Let's also assume that you guys have your way and he is in a gun-free zone, I like to call them criminal enabling zones but I digress, and that there are no law-abiding people practicing concealed carry. This would-be killer gets off 10 easy shots without regard for actually needing to defend himself. 10 shots, no defense.

Now let's use my logic. Crazed killer is walking into a mall or a school to perform bad deeds and mayhem. The first person that sees him just happens to be a concealed or open carry person and is able to draw down on the offender without delay. Three things happen; one, a possible firefight, two, a killer that decides getting shot isn't that appealing and gives up, or three, the offender is quickly taken out by the CCW holder.

In any case my logic a possible zero shots vs. your logic at least 10 shots.


And the Ron Paul mentality is making an amendment to the Constitution in order to change it. You'll be very hard pressed to find any quote from me claiming anything about religion, but FYI the Founding Father's claimed that the Bill Of Rights are God-given and that they are there so that the general government remains Constitutionally limited and the people remain free from tyranny.

Their words, not mine.

catefrances

unsung wrote:

Sacha and Malia are worth no more than any of your children.

to me they are worth less than my own, tho given sophies choice on the matter id asked to be killed if it kept them(and all children) alive. . however... your country is full of crazy nutters whod think nothing of targetting children.... whether they be the children of the president or kindergartners in newtown.

unsung

I've also never said I had a problem with background checks and I can't recall seeing anyone here say that there should be none.

unsung

catefrances wrote:

unsung wrote:

Sacha and Malia are worth no more than any of your children.

to me they are worth less than my own, tho given sophies choice on the matter id asked to be killed if it kept them(and all children) alive. . however... your country is full of crazy nutters whod think nothing of targetting children.... whether they be the children of the president or kindergartners in newtown.

Oh geez, where are you when the school kids are caught in the crossfire in Chicago? Or is it only white first graders that tug at the ol heartstrings? Because a great deal more black youths are killed by illegal guns in Chicago than white first-graders are killed by legal guns that are stolen.

When will you people realize that criminals do not follow laws?

catefrances

unsung wrote:

I've also never said I had a problem with background checks and I can't recall seeing anyone here say that there should be none.

sure if you all feel the need to be armed hows about you limit the capacity of the weapons available so that everyones playing on a level field?

unsung

So the police/government will use no more than 10 rounds too?


I am not suggesting that they are the enemy.

catefrances

unsung wrote:

catefrances wrote:

unsung wrote:

Sacha and Malia are worth no more than any of your children.

to me they are worth less than my own, tho given sophies choice on the matter id asked to be killed if it kept them(and all children) alive. . however... your country is full of crazy nutters whod think nothing of targetting children.... whether they be the children of the president or kindergartners in newtown.

Oh geez, where are you when the school kids are caught in the crossfire in Chicago? Or is it only white first graders that tug at the ol heartstrings? Because a great deal more black youths are killed by illegal guns in Chicago than white first-graders are killed by legal guns that are stolen.

When will you people realize that criminals do not follow laws?

calm down unsung, it was just an example. we were talking about hypoethical direct targetting of the children of the president when you mentioned sascha and malia were we not? hence my newtown comparison, where again, but not hypothetically, children were deliberately targetted. thats all i was going for.

unsung

catefrances wrote:

calm down unsung, it was just an example. we were talking about hypoethical direct targetting of the children of the president when you mentioned sascha and malia were we not? hence my newtown comparison, where again, but not hypothetically, children were deliberately targetted. thats all i was going for.

I'm quite calm, thanks. My point was that everyone, here/media/nation/world has bleeding hearts for these rich white kids in CT but do not seem to care much about the EVERYDAY gang violence in some of the large cities.

But please tell me again how banning high-cap magazines will stop that crime. In fact, tell me how ANY new gun control law will stop that crime.

vant0037

unsung wrote:

catefrances wrote:

calm down unsung, it was just an example. we were talking about hypoethical direct targetting of the children of the president when you mentioned sascha and malia were we not? hence my newtown comparison, where again, but not hypothetically, children were deliberately targetted. thats all i was going for.

I'm quite calm, thanks. My point was that everyone, here/media/nation/world has bleeding hearts for these rich white kids in CT but do not seem to care much about the EVERYDAY gang violence in some of the large cities.

But please tell me again how banning high-cap magazines will stop that crime. In fact, tell me how ANY new gun control law will stop that crime.

I absolutely care about gang violence everyday. I think the sheer presence of 2 guns for every 3 people in the entire country makes that type of violence all too easy as well. So...yeah. Reduce the number of guns in the hands of people disposed to commit crime. Close loopholes that allow guns to be bought and sold without oversight. Reinvest in communities and education (yeah, I said it) to help curb gang activity. Propose comprehensive regulations so that there are more "responsible" owners and less guns in the hands of irresponsible, um, "handlers."

Gun violence in Newtown or Oakland is a problem. If we know that mental illness and the sheer availability of guns contribute, why not attack both ends? Why is that such a difficult compromise for people?