quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

I bow to your superior tactical approach to this. Let's wait and see if the cop lived through it and what HIS version of events is though shall we ? I admit to not being anybody's hero and yes, even though I was trained in the military ( and a damn good regiment too), there is no way I am going to try and sneak up behind some crazy with a quick-firer and a heavy-duty hand-gun with just a pistol of some sort in my hand. I think all I might succeed in doing is annoying him and heavens !!! who KNOWS where that might lead ??

How about head shot from a distance of hiding place?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Staleek

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

That demonstrates why people with severe brain damage shouldn't estimate anything.

That's so much horseshit and you know it. If you don't know, then you're more than a bit thick.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

FR

Another sobering read:

http://thoughtcatalog.com/jacob-geers/2016/06/here-are-all-the-people-applauding-the-orlando-gay-club-shooter/

They are subhuman scum no matter what group they belong to.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

The NRA says that, but even they don't believe it.

Nice to know you can tell what other people are thinking in their head...or are retreating into irrelevancy because you just don't have the facts to back your positions. I wonder which it is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Staleek

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

That demonstrates why people with severe brain damage shouldn't estimate anything.

That's so much horseshit and you know it. If you don't know, then you're more than a bit thick.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

"Islam for Dummies," "The Koran for Dummies" and "Arabic for Dummies" from Amazon before they left for Syria.

And I bet those books are written by muslim apologists which has nothing but peaceful interpretations in it!
Let me tell you what is one problem with Islam. The authentic book is in Arabic. But the English versions. Can have like 2 completely opposite translation of the same verse, depending on which English translation you wanna follow.
I highly doubt a "dummy guide book", is following the one that most sharia law countries that follows the authentic and original arabic version, follows.
So what proof is that exactly?

Actually, what you say is very true. Moslems use, as an article of faith, the fact that the Koran was written in Arabic and hasn't ever lost anything in translation as a proof that any conflict between the Koran and "The Book" (the Bible and Old Testament both of which Islam consider Devine) means the Koran is correct and the older books have lost things in translation. Arab speaking Moslems say you cannot understand the Koran if not read in Arabic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Staleek

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

That demonstrates why people with severe brain damage shouldn't estimate anything.

That's so much horseshit and you know it. If you don't know, then you're more than a bit thick.

This has been verified by numerous sources, including the FBI and CDC.
It must be over 1 million since Bloomberg has admitted to half that.

Of course being in the UK it is unlikely you have ever even heard the truth on any firearms related issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
For fuck's sake there is a clear differential between military armaments and civilian and NO, the founders did not intend for civilians to be armed with military weapons and using predator drones for home defense you insufferable fucking moron.

I believe you're wrong about the founders belief and would ask you for a citation?

The Second amendment is a) Specific to a well-regulated militia and b) a collective right, not a personal right.

The militia is significant because the founding fathers regarded standing armies as "engines of oppression". They distrusted the very notion of a standing army and felt that a disciplined organisational unit made up of citizens was an important component of the collective defense. Basically, they were afraid of a military coup.

Article II, Section 8, Line 15 of the Constitution says that Congress has the power "to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions". In other words, the Militia is a component of the national defense including defending the people against any who rebel against the government. Line 16 says, "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."

The second amendment provides for the participation of citizens IN that militia. It is not a right to arm yourself with a molotov and firebomb your neighbour's house because his dog keeps you up at night.

The "well-regulated militia" is known as the National Guard. Not "The National Guard of the United States" which is part of the military. All members of the National Guard are automatically members of the militia of the United States SPECIFICALLY spoken of in the Constitution as specified in Title 10 of the United States Code.

If you're not part of the militia of the United States, then the second amendment simply does not apply to you.

What you're saying, again is a, made up from whole cloth, argument of the left in order to make fascism safe and palatable to people.

That's emotive bullshit and anyone with half a brain can see that possession of a gun doesn't do a damn to protect you against the United States government. They have drones, tanks and all manner of military gadgets - you may as well use a pop gun.

And the US government doesn't have to oppress you anyway. You're all too fucking apathetic to actually vote and you care more about what corporations tell you than anything else. Any nonsense you gun nuts mutter about "disarming the citizenry" is just empty rhetoric. The average citizen is HIGHLY dependent upon the good graces of the US government and even more so - the corporations to whom you have ceded so much power.

quote:


Legal scholars have discussed it for years and it's easy to google the errors in your thinking.

It's easy to google self-serving arguments made by gun nuts and the NRA. That doesn't constitute quality argument.

quote:

For example, your interpretation would make the 2nd amendment the absolute only part of the constitution that was interpreted in that manner and with that English usage. Applying that logic to the rest of the constitution would significantly change the entire thing. When you apply common English usage used in the other parts of the constitution to the 2nd amendment your entire thesis falls apart.

Bullshit. Prove it.

The second amendment is pretty clear that it's talking about a militia. The NRA has had a vested interest in promoting firearms for decades and their ongoing activism has corrupted the original intent of the second amendment. And basically, you guys can't be trusted with guns. You're too unstable. And your society is fucking falling apart at the seams because of it.

People can 3d-print guns now. What do you think is going to happen when everyone uses guns to settle their disputes? Do you have any understanding of how likely it is that the US will devolve into a third-world nation torn apart by domestic disputes solved with armed drones?

Honestly, the psychological need you people have for guns is disturbing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Staleek

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Some extracts from a very interesting piece in today's Guardian on the Florida shooter:
"When asked why she thought he went regularly to a gay club, Yusufiy told CNN: “When we had gotten married, he confessed to me about his past that was recent at that time, and that he very much enjoyed going to clubs and the nightlife … I feel like it’s a side of him or a part of him that he lived but probably didn’t want everybody to know about.” Asked if she thought he was gay, she said: “I don’t know.”

And then there’s the fact that Seddique Mir Mateen told media that Omar had been angered after seeing a gay couple kissing in public while he was out with his three-year-old son.

If analysts are already weighing up the implications of possible links with Isis, if presidential candidates are taking it as read that Mateen was part of a web of Islamist terror spreading across the globe, let me imagine a situation in which sex, not sectarianism, plays a part. Transgressive sexuality and conservative religion can be a toxic mix. If Mateen felt conflicted about his interest in gay men, it could have been because he believed his faith would condemn him for it. There’s no easy answer to this. “Ban religion,” say some atheists, but it’s not that simple. We must encourage the compassionate and disparage the dogmatists. Strive for conditions which promote kindness, rather than judgment.

When I interviewed him recently for another article, the distinguished psychologist Samuel Juni told me: “Running away and trying to get in touch are psychologically not contradictory ... When you’re running, part of you is running from something that you would very much like to be in touch with but you can’t.” The annihilation on Sunday morning may have been Mateen’s final attempt to run away from the thing that obsessed him.

All of this poses a problem for the likes of Donald Trump, who told his Twitter followers, as the blood on the bathroom walls of Pulse was still drying, that he “appreciate[d] the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism”.

If a heady combination of shame and sexuality were part of what drove Mateen’s decisions that morning, how is that to be policed? How can we, to borrow the language of counter-terrorism, “eradicate” the “scourge” of internalised homophobia? Of a feeling that one’s desires are dirty and humiliating? You can’t easily make a homeland secure against self-loathing.

Donald Trump, meet human nature, in all its messy, depraved and self-defeating complexity. Sadly, complexity was never your strong point." (emphasis added)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/14/omar-mateen-gay-men-terrorism-pulse-jackd-sexuality

If homophobia and self loathing is at the heart of the shooter's motives, then all the gun control or lack of it, and all the bomb the ME into a sheet of glass belligerence aren't going to make a shred of difference preventing another attack for the same reasons. Regardless of what action is taken in other spheres, there is no excuse now not to adopt serious measures to minimise incitement against queers and queer phobia.

Gun control, a complete ban on firearms for ordinary citizens, would make a massive difference to the scale and hazard potential of future attacks like this.

I can snap, take a knife, and go on a stabbing spree, but as soon as people see me walking towards them with a blood-drenched dagger, wearing nothing more than a lunatic grin, they're going to run like mad. I might catch a few people, but there is no way that I'm going to kill 40 people in as many seconds even if they all line up nicely and wait to get stabbed.

Assault weapons in the hands of joe public is a mind-numbingly bad idea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

The NRA says that, but even they don't believe it.

Nice to know you can tell what other people are thinking in their head...or are retreating into irrelevancy because you just don't have the facts to back your positions. I wonder which it is.

I believe it was also Awareness who referred to an AR 15 as a "high-powered weapon", as do many of the gun-grabbers. Of course, they also refer to it as an assault rifle. It is not.

http://tribunist.com/news/when-you-hear-someone-call-an-ar-15-an-assault-rifle-show-them-this/

For comparison, check out this article from CNN and see just how many mistakes you can find:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/13/news/ar-15-assault-rifle/

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

Dude, all that frantic back-pedaling doesn't change the fact that the weapon the Singapore cop was using will easily penetrate an automobile body. Cars don't stop bullets and the odds that a law enforcement officer (aside from SWAT) is even going to TRY to take and take a head shot are extremely low.

Everything else you brought up is just plain irrelevant.

Actually, only to someone ignorant about the topic would consider it irrelevant. The amount of data and experience collected by aw enforcement since the invention of your .38 special hi-speed has enormously affected police tactics and training. So much so that your ignorance in your statement shows just how out of touch you are with the real world on this topic. And, may I ask, just how is demonstrating with links and facts back peddling? Is that an irrelevancy rearing its head?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

The NRA says that, but even they don't believe it.

Nice to know you can tell what other people are thinking in their head...or are retreating into irrelevancy because you just don't have the facts to back your positions. I wonder which it is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
I believe it was also Awareness who referred to an AR 15 as a "high-powered weapon", as do many of the gun-grabbers. Of course, they also refer to it as an assault rifle. It is not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

Dude, all that frantic back-pedaling doesn't change the fact that the weapon the Singapore cop was using will easily penetrate an automobile body. Cars don't stop bullets and the odds that a law enforcement officer (aside from SWAT) is even going to TRY to take and take a head shot are extremely low.

Everything else you brought up is just plain irrelevant.

Actually, only to someone ignorant about the topic would consider it irrelevant. The amount of data and experience collected by aw enforcement since the invention of your .38 special hi-speed has enormously affected police tactics and training. So much so that your ignorance in your statement shows just how out of touch you are with the real world on this topic. And, may I ask, just how is demonstrating with links and facts back peddling? Is that an irrelevancy rearing its head?

It's back-pedaling because you stopped arguing about the weapon itself and started to babble on about irrelevancies. They're irrelevant because we're talking about the ability of a specific handgun to penetrate a modern automobile chassis. Your rambling about other weapons and modern body armour has no bearing on the topic whatsoever.

From what I can make out you're speculating that a law enforcement organisation which uses what you term an "ancient" handgun is going to mysteriously shoot for the head despite the weapon having no problem penetrating the car body. It sounds to me like you're talking out of your fucking ass, regardless of how obsessed you are with masturbatory gun fantasies.

Look dude, I don't really care. This side discussion isn't germaine to the topic and your posturing is a waste of fucking time. Greta's comment was a tangent to the main discussion anyway. Speculate all you like, but you're sure as shit not putting together anything remotely convincing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
And yet it's estimated that guns in America prevent somewhere between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 violent crimes per year. I think letting you make any decision is a mind-numbingly bad idea. Especially if I were a woman who wanted to fight back against a big rapist dude.

The NRA says that, but even they don't believe it.

Nice to know you can tell what other people are thinking in their head...or are retreating into irrelevancy because you just don't have the facts to back your positions. I wonder which it is.

The NRA want to sell weapons. Period. That is their only mission. Consequently, it's pretty fucking obvious they'll say anything to keep you scared.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Actually, from what you've just said, you know nothing about the NRA. You'll need to google again. And...yes...if you try to argue it I'll make you look like you're talking out of your ass again. So back pedal now, stop now, or be an igit. You choose.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Actually, from what you've just said, you know nothing about the NRA. You'll need to google again. And...yes...if you try to argue it I'll make you look like you're talking out of your ass again. So back pedal now, stop now, or be an igit. You choose.

Dude, the NRA is a political organisation which advances the cause of firearm manufacturers. Oh, they sweep up the gun-nuts because people whose sense of manhood is tied up in their weapons equate gun control with castration - but make no mistake, the NRA is about keeping the populace afraid and selling them more guns.

Or haven't you noticed that the NRA's solution to everything is: "More guns"?

Believe me, if you're trying to argue the NRA has any fucking credibility whatsoever then you're the one who's going to make a fucking fool of yourself. Their lies and propaganda are legendary.