Gun laws do they work

[Brianwarnock]

Why the "sorry" ;is autumn vs fall different?

There were people that you meet that no doubt carried a gun. Were there any concerns or reservations here. What about the convenience store that probably has a pistol or shotgun under the counter, etc.... You did not even think about it or did you!

As far as the autumn /fall issue I was merely trying to be polite and use your terminology .

As to the gun issue why should I think about it? What point are you trying to gain from my response to your original question?

What % of people that I met would be carrying a gun?
I would add that none had assault rifles.

Brian

 

[Frothingslosh]

I don't think it courteous to imply some-one as an enemy of the state because they differ from your point of view. It's all tip your hat and apple-pie until you talk about something with any meaning. Pretty disingenuous if you ask me.

Gun control 'debates' always wind up with conservatives accusing liberals of being traitors attempting to destroy the American Way of Life by disarming the population so that some sort of nazi-communisti-fascist government straight out of Ninteteen Eighty-Four can be put into place, with the other goal being the 'destruction' of capitalism and forced, Stalin-esque communism (mislabled as socialism, don't you know) being put in place to replace it. Because obviously, people who don't wan't mentally ill people and convincted criminals to have guns hate freedom and income.

That kind of BS has happened repeatedly in this thread, and makes me wonder why I stuck my head in at all, seeing as that those individuals have zero interest in actually having any kind of civil discussion. They're here to parade right-wing propaganda, not to talk.

 

[Bladerunner]

I don't think it courteous to imply some-one as an enemy of the state because they differ from your point of view. It's all tip your hat and apple-pie until you talk about something with any meaning. Pretty disingenuous if you ask me.

good evening Dan-cat: Lets see, how can I say this to make sense to you and me.

Change is good for the most part. And in the US, we have a method/channel for these changes. Most of the time they balance themselves out over a period of time. However, since 2009, it has become apparent that there is a group that would like nothing more than to destroy capitalism and advance socialism on everyone in all 50 states. These are activists and unless you agree with them, you are the enemy. They will try to destroy you in any fashion available to them. To some extent, they are much like those in the Ukraine who want to upset the so-called "apple cart" by intimidation, slander, defrauding the election system, etc.

I have lived for 60 something years and have never seen anything like this. The apathy which in turn caused the majority being lead down a primerose path by the minority whose whole agenda is to destroy a way of life and make the US a third world country.

 

[Bladerunner]

As far as the autumn /fall issue I was merely trying to be polite and use your terminology .

As to the gun issue why should I think about it? What point are you trying to gain from my response to your original question?

What % of people that I met would be carrying a gun?
I would add that none had assault rifles.

Brian

Exactly. Yes Brian that is the whole ball of wax. you hear complaints about gun owners but if you walk around here in the US you will probably never see one carried on the hip(like a cowboy)except for the law enforcement. We bother no one, yet they want to force us to (wrong), they want to deny us gun owners the right to even own such hardware. Gun Control is about the banning of all weapons from everyone much like your country did.

AS for the autumn/fall thing. forget it, either way is fine with most people. we have used them interchangeably for a long time. In fact, autumn brings to mind the month of August/September (depending which state you are in) and fall is usually associated with the beautiful pallet of colors of 'fall leaves'

 

[Bladerunner]

Gun control 'debates' always wind up with conservatives accusing liberals of being traitors attempting to destroy the American Way of Life by disarming the population so that some sort of nazi-communisti-fascist government straight out of Ninteteen Eighty-Four can be put into place, with the other goal being the 'destruction' of capitalism and forced, Stalin-esque communism (mislabled as socialism, don't you know) being put in place to replace it. Because obviously, people who don't wan't mentally ill people and convincted criminals to have guns hate freedom and income.

Mr. Frothingslosh:Nobody wants the mentally ill and convicted criminals to have guns but some of them have weapons. They can get them on any street corner. Take Chicago. they have the strickest gun laws in the land. If you get a permit to own a gun, it has to stay in the house (not on the porch, front or back yards) in the house. Yet every weekend, there are multiple murders from gangs that get their guns illegally.

I guess my question is to everyone Why do you want to "disarm the population", knowing that if all the guns were confiscated, the only ones with guns would be the law and the criminals. And there are more criminals than law enforcement.

That kind of BS has happened repeatedly in this thread, and makes me wonder why I stuck my head in at all, seeing as that those individuals have zero interest in actually having any kind of civil discussion. They're here to parade right-wing propaganda, not to talk.

That is your opinion. your right and that right is as important as the views of any of us on this thread. Whether you stay or leave is up to you, but if you stay civilized discussion on yours and others views are forthcoming.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Yet more examples of disngenious, manipulative non-discussion:

Why do you want to "disarm the population"

This here is what we call a false statement, aka a LIE. You are falsifying what I have said so that you can both put me on the defensive by stating I said something I never did, and 'disprove' the strawman you created. It is the gun debate's version of 'So when did you stop beating your wife?'.

Another would be this argument:

it has become apparent that there is a group that would like nothing more than to destroy capitalism and advance socialism on everyone in all 50 states.

This is nothing more than inflammatory rhetoric based on conjecture spewed by right-wing alarmists. You're taking the most extreme, lunatic, absurd, ultra-minority belief you can find and portraying it as the end goal of everyone you disagree with. It is no more accurate than I would be were I to say that "there are groups which want to eliminate all non-white individuals from the US, remove all rights from women, return them to their biblically-mandated position running home and kitchen and providing babies" and then portraying that the the primary goal of American conservatives. (And yes, such groups actually exist. Both examples are vanishingly small groups with membership measured in the dozens, or at best, hundreds, and are rightly considered lunatics by virtually everyone else.)

You are not interested in actual discussion when every argument you make is based on rhetoric and logical fallicies that, while common in political discussion aimed at manipulating votes, have no place in actual debates. You've given up attempting to win minds and are instead attempting to win the discussion through fear and lies.

 

[dan-cat]

I have lived for 60 something years and have never seen anything like this. The apathy which in turn caused the majority being lead down a primerose path by the minority whose whole agenda is to destroy a way of life and make the US a third world country.

Does this link make you feel any better? Link

 

[dan-cat]

Gun Control is about the banning of all weapons from everyone much like your country did.

Here is the White House's proposals Link

It doesn't include a total ban on guns, as you well know. Perhaps the proposals are flawed perhaps they are sound but the problem is you don't even allow yourself to reach a point of objective consideration.

If you think about it calmly, isn't it perfectly reasonable to respond to something so grotesque as the Sandy Hook shootings with some legislative proposals? What is so unreasonable about such a step?

 

[Dick7Access]

He seems to be making two points, which one are you querying.

As to the first I can only say that the thought that I might be in a shop/business when a gunman holds up the place and trigger happy customers start firing would scare me to death, just give him the money and lets all stay alive, well me anyway.

Brian

no I am not giving him the money.

I am ticked. Case in point. Not next town over, not last year, but today. I have a buyer for my RV. I went out to start it up and somebody siphoned 40 gals of gas ($150.00). 4 feet from my door. Bone dry. If I heard them doing it and I went out with my heat, and held them until the police arrived, are you telling me that if they made one false move that I would not have the right to put three or four rounds in them. That would not be living free that would be living at the whim of every punk and criminal element. BTW would he be more/less dead or would I be lest guilty if I shot him with my palm gun, or more guilty if I used an assault weapon?

 

[dan-cat]

That would not be living free that would be living at the whim of every punk and criminal element.

This reminded me of that scene in Schindler's list when the concept of power is discussed. Link

I believe your notion of freedom has been enslaved by the iniquities of others.

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

no I am not giving him the money.

I am ticked. Case in point. Not next town over, not last year, but today. I have a buyer for my RV. I went out to start it up and somebody siphoned 40 gals of gas ($150.00). 4 feet from my door. Bone dry. If I heard them doing it and I went out with my heat, and held them until the police arrived, are you telling me that if they made one false move that I would not have the right to put three or four rounds in them. That would not be living free that would be living at the whim of every punk and criminal element. BTW would he be more/less dead or would I be lest guilty if I shot him with my palm gun, or more guilty if I used an assault weapon?

Wouldn't you be at risk of blowing both of you up as the gun ignited the petrol fumes?

 

[Brianwarnock]

no I am not giving him the money.

So you would prefer to risk killing others in the shop rather than a thug get away with a few dollars, I take it that is good Christian thinking.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

BTW would he be more/less dead or would I be lest guilty if I shot him with my palm gun, or more guilty if I used an assault weapon?

Dead is dead, but it would appear that gun nuts cannot understand the difference an assault weapon versus a handgun in a warped persons hand.

Brian

 

[Dick7Access]

Wouldn't you be at risk of blowing both of you up as the gun ignited the petrol fumes?

Chance I would have to take!!!!

 

[Dick7Access]

Dead is dead, but it would appear that gun nuts cannot understand the difference an assault weapon versus a handgun in a warped persons hand.

Brian

Your right Brian, but I am keeping mine. Pun intended. To add fuel to your fire I almost laughed mine off writing this.

 

[Bladerunner]

Does this link make you feel any better? Link

Hi-Dan-cat

Yes

 

[Bladerunner]

Yet more examples of disngenious, manipulative non-discussion:
This here is what we call a false statement, aka a LIE.

I believe it was a question not a statement!

You are not interested in actual discussion when every argument you make is based on rhetoric and logical fallicies that, while common in political discussion aimed at manipulating votes, have no place in actual debates. You've given up attempting to win minds and are instead attempting to win the discussion through fear and lies.

I will ask you one QUESTION? What is you idea of a perfect solution concerning gun control. Take into account all fifty states?

 

[Bladerunner]

Here is the White House's proposals Link

surely you don't want me to refute all of these do you. I think the NRA has done so repeatedly.

It doesn't include a total ban on guns, as you well know. Perhaps the proposals are flawed perhaps they are sound but the problem is you don't even allow yourself to reach a point of objective consideration.

The ban on guns comes after the good will legislation is passed to required all the good feeling thing you people want to hear. They the simply deny me a license to carry or own. (i.e. My wife and I both sent our renewals in at the same time. Her LTC came back 2 weeks before mine did. No I have no record, not even a speeding ticket.)

I ask you a question. Why not enforce the present set of laws. If enforced these laws they would lower crime by targeting the criminal and their avenue of getting guns and other weapons.

If you think about it calmly, isn't it perfectly reasonable to respond to something so grotesque as the Sandy Hook shootings with some legislative proposals?

NO! No feel good legislation is going to work. This kid was a nut case that somebody missed. Most of these people are mental and leave red herrins for everyone to see yet no one picked up on any of these problems prior to the shooting.

Legislation will not even begin to address the problem. You people keep dodging the problem. Again, look to Chicago. 40 people dead in a weekend by gang shootings yet they have next to a full ban on guns in the nation.

May 18, 1927, in Bath Township, Michigan, that killed 38 elementary school children and six adults in total, and injured at least 58 other people.[Note 1] Kehoe first killed his wife, fire-bombed his farm and set off a major explosion in the Bath Consolidated School, before committing suicide by detonating a final explosion in his truck. It is the deadliest mass murder in a school in United States history.[1][2]

Where was the so called indignation about this mass murderer. These people again are nut cases and it will not matter they will find a way. Once the guns are confiscated, the government has a free hand to do anything (i.e. Hitler 1939)

 

[Dick7Access]

Marine Vet Watches Robbery Unfold, Intervenes; One Dead

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/29/m...ery-unfold-intervenes-one-dead/#ixzz33ABYOxu5
​

 

[Dick7Access]

Something interesting jut occurred to me about this thread. The more people that are killed by mentally unbalance people, the more us gun nuts cling to our guns. Then the more the anti- 2nd amendment people want to take away our guns, which the more we buy and hide guns. Round and round she goes, where she stops know body knows. If more gun laws are pasted would not the anti- 2nd amendment people expect us gun nuts to obey the law. Of course you would want us to. Is this not a fair scenario? Then why not offer us up the same thing. There is a legal way to get rid of the second amendment. Why not follow the law .It’s call repealing the 2nd amendment
. I would have a lot more respect for a movement like that, than for a maneuver from some liberal judge legislating from the bench.
Ps. Shortly I am going to Biloxi MS for two and a half weeks and will not be on line as much, so I don’t want anybody thinking I am wimping out on a tough questing. Also anybody in that area want to attend a AWF lunch or dinner please contact me. We have one scheduled for Aug 12th 2014 in Jacksonville, FL
Come join us, the more the merrier.