Sure living up to your norm. When no well thought out response come .......name call. Really, really adult behavior....NOT
Gun Control is Completely Useless.
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
Dear, you are not capable of a well thought out response.
That is the essence of the problem.
What!! I'm the one with the obsession?? I don't own a gun and I really don't mind, safe and controlled guns in the hands of non-aggressive, reasonable persons who wish to hunt, or those who want to collect guns or enjoy target shooting. I simply feel there should be rules and regulations governing the use of them.
The ones with the gun obsession are those who feel they should be given the freedom to own them without anything other than a wish to do so. No rules, no regulations, no registration and good grief no fingerprinting. Some even feel, children should be allowed to use and own a gun before they are legally allowed to operate an automobile.
Some third world countries actually use child soldiers. I happen to believe a civilized society should not allow children to own and use a gun anymore than they should be allowed to operate a motor vehicle until they prove they know the rules of the road, earned a license, purchased insurance and paying to register it.
A car is a machine, designed to get one from one place to another . Licenses, insurance and registration are required. So exactly who has the obsession?? Those who feel they have the right to buy a item specifically designed to kill without any rules controlling the use of such an item or someone who feels there needs to be controls on them.
For example:
I
Ahhh........the survey included rifles and shotguns, and it included dealer's stockpiles, and that is perfectly obvious.
In the USA "illicit" guns would be a miniscule percentage, as gun ownership is pretty wide open........and they would certainly be encompassed by the upper 310 million estimate.
Military firearms are BY DEFINITION not in civilian hands, and so are excluded from the survey.
These obvious facts make your reply idiotic.
Then you go on:
Guns also fall out of the stockpile as they are destroyed, etc.........If the average gun lasted 30 years, and was then destroyed, the 10 million new guns would simply be replacing those gone from the system.........
Then yo go off on a complete tangent, on about the 90 per hundred does not include people.
HUH??
HUH??
Thus proving irrevocably that you are an idiot.
"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him". —Proverbs 26:4
I was just TRYING to obey the biblical instruction........
Ahhh........the survey included rifles and shotguns, and it included dealer's stockpiles, and that is perfectly obvious.
In the USA "illicit" guns would be a miniscule percentage, as gun ownership is pretty wide open........and they would certainly be encompassed by the upper 310 million estimate.
Military firearms are BY DEFINITION not in civilian hands, and so are excluded from the survey.
These obvious facts make your reply idiotic.
Then you go on:
Guns also fall out of the stockpile as they are destroyed, etc.........If the average gun lasted 30 years, and was then destroyed, the 10 million new guns would simply be replacing those gone from the system.........
Then yo go off on a complete tangent, on about the 90 per hundred does not include people.
HUH??
HUH??
Thus proving irrevocably that you are an idiot.
"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him". —Proverbs 26:4
I was just TRYING to obey the biblical instruction........
The problem is that I am very capable of a reasoned and very well thought out response. Name calling and condescension is not a reasoned or thought out response, in spite of what you believe. It is simply an emotional response. What if you were holding a loaded gun???
To start with I owned a gun by the age of 12 and was quite capable at handling it. Second while I agree with a few rules and regulations (very few), criminals and crackpots don't obey rules and regulations.
Quotes answered.
As to a survey that purports to relate guns to a country's population, but only includes hand guns or small arms, is skewed from the getgo.
Then you go on:
Guns also fall out of the stockpile as they are destroyed, etc.........If the average gun lasted 30 years, and was then destroyed, the 10 million new guns would simply be replacing those gone from the system.........
Then yo go off on a complete tangent, on about the 90 per hundred does not include people.........
If a survey is accurate, it will be done based on users of an article.......I have never seen a gun-toting new-born, have you.
HUH??
HUH??
Thus proving irrevocably that you are an idiot.
Ah once again........well it seems a reasoned well thought out response on your part is name calling. How adult!!
"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him". —Proverbs 26:4
I was just TRYING to obey the biblical instruction........
Since the bible was written by tribal barbarians I didn't expect more.
I
Ahhh........the survey included rifles and shotguns, and it included dealer's stockpiles, and that is perfectly obvious.
To whom?? Nowhere are these mentioned in that article.
In the USA "illicit" guns would be a miniscule percentage, as gun ownership is pretty wide open........and they would certainly be encompassed by the upper 310 million estimate.
Military firearms are BY DEFINITION not in civilian hands, and so are excluded from the survey.
These obvious facts make your reply idiotic.
Miniscule?? There is a survey out there, that states gun dealers are approached many times MONTH, with requests to buy unregistered guns. I am not naïve enough to believe these persons will not find a way to get one. I really do not believe that an ex-con or those on parole have any kind of problem getting a gun. Nor do I believe a hold up artist, rapist, bank robber etc. will use a registered gun in committing a crime, do you??
Ahhh........the survey included rifles and shotguns, and it included dealer's stockpiles, and that is perfectly obvious.
To whom?? Nowhere are these mentioned in that article.
In the USA "illicit" guns would be a miniscule percentage, as gun ownership is pretty wide open........and they would certainly be encompassed by the upper 310 million estimate.
Military firearms are BY DEFINITION not in civilian hands, and so are excluded from the survey.
These obvious facts make your reply idiotic.
Miniscule?? There is a survey out there, that states gun dealers are approached many times MONTH, with requests to buy unregistered guns. I am not naïve enough to believe these persons will not find a way to get one. I really do not believe that an ex-con or those on parole have any kind of problem getting a gun. Nor do I believe a hold up artist, rapist, bank robber etc. will use a registered gun in committing a crime, do you??
As to a survey that purports to relate guns to a country's population, but only includes hand guns or small arms, is skewed from the getgo.
Then you go on:
Guns also fall out of the stockpile as they are destroyed, etc.........If the average gun lasted 30 years, and was then destroyed, the 10 million new guns would simply be replacing those gone from the system.........
Then yo go off on a complete tangent, on about the 90 per hundred does not include people.........
If a survey is accurate, it will be done based on users of an article.......I have never seen a gun-toting new-born, have you.
HUH??
HUH??
Thus proving irrevocably that you are an idiot.
Ah once again........well it seems a reasoned well thought out response on your part is name calling. How adult!!
"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him". —Proverbs 26:4
I was just TRYING to obey the biblical instruction........
Since the bible was written by tribal barbarians I didn't expect more.
Do you also advocate giving a youngster an automobile at that age as well?? Or do you simply want to do away with driving lessons, auto insurance, licenses and registrations??
There you go......Maybe you should read this and learn unless your Alzheimer is to far advanced
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/troubleshooting/89902-quoting-multi-quoting.html
At the age of 2018? Doubtful! -
Nope, but why would you equate automobiles with guns?
At the age of 2018? Doubtful! -
Nope, but why would you equate automobiles with guns?[/QUOTE]
Because they kill more people than guns?
So do swimming pools............
So do nagging wimmen!
No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money
"Send lawyers, guns and money. The **** has hit the fan." - Warren Zevon
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Dingy Harry Is Right - Billionaires Are Trying To Buy Democracy
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) gave a speech yesterday on the floor of the Senate. It was his first floor speech since the end of the August recess. As The Hill reports it, he said, in part,
However, if one were to examine the backers of the universal background check initiative in Washington State, I-594, you would come to the conclusion that a gaggle of billionaires was indeed trying to buy "our democracy."
Examining the public reports from the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission, one finds that a full 72% of the funding for the anti-gun Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility has come from five billionaires (including spouses) plus one very wealthy woman from an "old Seattle family". In dollar terms, these six have donated $5,171,600 out of the $7,175,542 donated to the anti-gun organization. Small contributions to this gun control ballot initiative total only $63,009 or less than 1% of the total.
So who are these billionaires (or near billionaires), how much have they given individually, what is their estimated net worth, and where do they stand on the Forbes 400 list of richest people in America. Here is the list in order of contributions:
As Dave Workman, the Seattle Gun Rights Examiner, put it, this is a billionaire bombardment and he is correct. So when Dingy Harry speaks of "radical billionaires attempting to buy our democracy", he just has the wrong set of billionaires in mind. It isn't the Koch brothers, it is the Hanauers, the Gates, the Allens, the Ballmers, and the Bloombergs who plan to dominate the TV airwaves with their appeals to low information voters in an effort to impose their will on the people of Washington State.
*Bloomberg's contribution was funneled through MAIG and Everytown for Gun Safety (sic).
"Send lawyers, guns and money. The **** has hit the fan." - Warren Zevon
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Dingy Harry Is Right - Billionaires Are Trying To Buy Democracy
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) gave a speech yesterday on the floor of the Senate. It was his first floor speech since the end of the August recess. As The Hill reports it, he said, in part,
“We have had in this country a flood of very, very dark money coming into this nation’s political system,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “Radical billionaires are attempting to buy our democracy.”
Reid is correct in his statement - just not in the billionaires to whom he referred. He, of course, was continuing his jihad against the libertarian Koch brothers.However, if one were to examine the backers of the universal background check initiative in Washington State, I-594, you would come to the conclusion that a gaggle of billionaires was indeed trying to buy "our democracy."
Examining the public reports from the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission, one finds that a full 72% of the funding for the anti-gun Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility has come from five billionaires (including spouses) plus one very wealthy woman from an "old Seattle family". In dollar terms, these six have donated $5,171,600 out of the $7,175,542 donated to the anti-gun organization. Small contributions to this gun control ballot initiative total only $63,009 or less than 1% of the total.
So who are these billionaires (or near billionaires), how much have they given individually, what is their estimated net worth, and where do they stand on the Forbes 400 list of richest people in America. Here is the list in order of contributions:
- Nick Hanauer, $1,485,000; net worth $1 billion, venture capitalist, Second Avenue Investing
- Bill and Melinda Gates, $1,050,000; net worth $72 billion, No. 1 Forbes 400, co-founder Microsoft
- Michael Bloomberg*, $1,030,000; net worth $31 billion, No. 10 Forbes 400, founder Bloomberg LP
- Connie and Steve Ballmer, $830,000; net worth $18 billion, No. 21 Forbes 400, former CEO Microsoft, owner LA Clippers
- Paul Allen, $500,000; net worth $15.8 billion, No 26 Forbes 400, co-founder Microsoft, owner Seattle Seahawks and Portland Trail Blazers
- Ann Pigott Wyckoff, $276,600; net worth est. multi-millions, heiress and daughter of the late Paccar Corporation president Paul Pigott. Paccar manufactures Peterbilt, Kenworth, and Leyland trucks.
As Dave Workman, the Seattle Gun Rights Examiner, put it, this is a billionaire bombardment and he is correct. So when Dingy Harry speaks of "radical billionaires attempting to buy our democracy", he just has the wrong set of billionaires in mind. It isn't the Koch brothers, it is the Hanauers, the Gates, the Allens, the Ballmers, and the Bloombergs who plan to dominate the TV airwaves with their appeals to low information voters in an effort to impose their will on the people of Washington State.
*Bloomberg's contribution was funneled through MAIG and Everytown for Gun Safety (sic).
Dogs kill more people than tigers. Ban dogs. Free tigers for everyone!
And cars are super dangerous. It's true. Why aren't people advocating the regulation of cars? Like registration, insurance, designated areas for cars, mandatory licensing, testing and education for any one that drives a car. God, they are so dangerous. You hypocrites complain so much about gun regulation, but cars are way more deadly. WHY IS THERE NO CAR REGULATION?
That depends entirely on where you live.........
1. Nobody ever listed cars as one of the basic rights of free people, whereas in the English common law tradition, the right to keep and bear arms is an ancient right.
2. Registration of cars is simply a revenue generating regulation. One year I failed to register my car (true story) The next year they just charged me a double registration fee. If I neglect to register my pistol, I get a MANDATORY three year prison term.
3. If I do not drive my car on public roads, I need not register it. I will happily register every gun I intend to fire on public roads.
4. Registering a car does not give the gov't the right to search my home. Registering a firearm does. Blatantly unconstitutional.
5. In Canada, there are designated, approved areas for the use of handguns. They are called ranges, and must be passed by regular gov't inspection.
6. In Canada, there IS mandatory licensing, testing and education for the ownership and use of firearms. I have NO problem with that.
The comparison of guns and cars is one of the silliest arguments ever made.
We do have registrations for Restricted firearms and before you can own a firearm of any kind you have to pass tests to get a permit to own or purchase any firearm, and even in the '70s I had liability insurance for any accident involving the legal use of a firearm.... OFAH Members Public Liability Insurance | Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters
Anti gun people always seem to argue something they nothing about.
Only insofar as death statistics, when antis start claiming big bad guns are responsible for sooo many deaths......
Looks like both of you seem like pretty firm believers in gun control. Is there anyone in this thread still arguing that it's completely useless?