quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I see reading comprehension isn't your strong suit on this topic either.

So additional reading material probably won't help you. But it might help others.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nra-pushes-myths-guns-americans-safer-article-1.2646194
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/09/opinions/feinblatt-gun-control/
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/25/471726704/nra-rewrites-fairy-tales-with-more-firearms-less-bloodshed
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-le-1209-wednesday-guns-nra-20151209-story.html
https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/70416/navy-yard-shows-fallacy-nras-more-guns-solution
http://wonkette.com/598910/nra-offers-helpful-health-and-safety-tips-first-buy-a-gun-next-buy-more-guns

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

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.

I agreed with you earlier that when Lucy just laughes at you it wasn't a response and did show her ignorance. It's tough now not to do the same. I'm not going to google here, but as I last recall the NOW national organization of women had something like a couple of hundred members and the NRA had six million.

quote:


Just on that basis alone, the organization you describe above is absurd. If what you propose were true those in the gun culture would leave the organization in droves.

quote:

Having actually been a member of and reading NRA material for years I can't recall that the NRA's answer is always more guns, so please provide a link for that. I'm betting you can't or won't, you'll back pedal.

quote:


Please provide links to their lies and propaganda as well. I know leftist fascists say that is so, but I've never seen it proven as more than leftist koolaide BS. So, have you been at the koolaide?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
I see your point. But that's not what we were arguing about. Greta showed a head shot and you said it would never happen because police were taught to shoot center mass. You started back peddling that a 38 hi-speed could penetrate a door and should be where the police would shoot. So, you back peddled and I pointed out your knowledge was circa 1931 and you were full of s*it, which you are in this instance. I tell you what. You come to my place. I have steel you can shoot. Ive shot lots of steel. We'll pull a piece of steel out of a door, say a lock or a window frame, or something like that, then we'll coat that with outer door steel, then we'll pack that in a car door arm rest, We'll set that up and then put a chicken behind it. You shoot at the chicken, through the door stuff and then you tell me that a serious police organization would actually train that shit. It's BS, you back peddled because you didn't know what you were taking about, and, yes, it is a side point but it really really makes you look like you're talking out of your ass.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

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.

Oh, so the American FBI, the CDC and the gun grabbing ex mayor of NYC all agree that Awareness and Staleek are full of s*it in this regard. How interesting. But, I'm betting that no matter how much those two want to sound like experts, they've never read a thing on the topic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

1) The NRA consistently takes a position.

2) People note that the NRA consistently takes this position, take issue with it.

3) You object to #2 as biased and untrue.


Reality and you just aren't getting along.

Tell you what -- show us where the NRA is for fewer guns. OR for a consistent present level.

...because the only other alternative is ____________________ (think hard--you can do this!)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Are these guns preventing violent crimes estimated to be AK-15s?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

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.

Jesus Christ, what do you call a "high-powered weapon"? Does it have to fire a .50 anti-materiel round before you'll concede it's "high-powered"?

Fuck a duck, you gun nuts really do tie your sense of manhood to your weapons. It's pathetic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

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.

Jesus Christ, what do you call a "high-powered weapon"? Does it have to fire a .50 anti-materiel round before you'll concede it's "high-powered"?

Fuck a duck, you gun nuts really do tie your sense of manhood to your weapons. It's pathetic.

The .223 is not considered a powerful enough round to go deer hunting in most states.
The projectile is much smaller than most hunting rounds. In this respect it would even ranks behind the 30-30, a round developed in the 19th century.
You don't even understand the terms of the debate.
Any thing beyond a 30-06 woud be a high powered rifle.
Since you don't shoot you have no way of knowing how little relative power the .223 has so why don't you just keep quite and learn somthing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
I see your point. But that's not what we were arguing about. Greta showed a head shot and you said it would never happen because police were taught to shoot center mass. You started back peddling that a 38 hi-speed could penetrate a door and should be where the police would shoot. So, you back peddled and I pointed out your knowledge was circa 1931 and you were full of s*it, which you are in this instance. I tell you what. You come to my place. I have steel you can shoot. Ive shot lots of steel. We'll pull a piece of steel out of a door, say a lock or a window frame, or something like that, then we'll coat that with outer door steel, then we'll pack that in a car door arm rest, We'll set that up and then put a chicken behind it. You shoot at the chicken, through the door stuff and then you tell me that a serious police organization would actually train that shit. It's BS, you back peddled because you didn't know what you were taking about, and, yes, it is a side point but it really really makes you look like you're talking out of your ass.

No, I said that headshots are a fictional element for the most part and that law enforcement doctrine aims for the centre of body mass. You claimed the weapon wouldn't penetrate and I pointed out it would have no problem doing so. Then you went into irrelevancies and thought that constituted a winning argument. You babbled on about law enforcement tactics changing but failed to cite a comprehensive source which could demonstrate that Singapore cops are going to go for a headshot. If you've got one, you'd have cited it, but all you're doing is speculating and calling it fact.

You have steel? Great. An 18 gauge car door (which is what a Jeep is made of) is 1/20th of an inch thick. A family car can be 22 gauge which is 1/32nd of an inch think. Tape your chicken to your 1/20th of an inch thick steel and give it a shot. Take a picture for me. You'll be eating chicken for dinner.... what's left of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

So these violent crimes prevented -- excuse me, estimated to have been prevented -- were those prevented with assault rifles?

Or did just your average hand gun do the trick?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

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.

I agreed with you earlier that when Lucy just laughes at you it wasn't a response and did show her ignorance. It's tough now not to do the same. I'm not going to google here, but as I last recall the NOW national organization of women had something like a couple of hundred members and the NRA had six million.

Right because the NRA will never exaggerate their number of members will they? And we shouldn't point out that NRA members are actually a tiny minority of gun owners either, should we? Or that the income it received from membership dues fell by 27% in 2014?

And for reference, NOW claims to have around half a million members.... like you, I presume they're exaggerating but I'm guessing "a couple of hundred" is probably really not close to accurate.

quote:


Just on that basis alone, the organization you describe above is absurd. If what you propose were true those in the gun culture would leave the organization in droves.

Well based on the numbers, the NRA membership represents only 5% of the gun-owning community. So it doesn't exactly sound like a representative voice for gun owners.,

quote:

Having actually been a member of and reading NRA material for years I can't recall that the NRA's answer is always more guns, so please provide a link for that. I'm betting you can't or won't, you'll back pedal.

You mean the NRA's response to National Gun Violence Day which was "go to the range and splurge on a new gun" wasn't about more guns? Sure seems like it.

Or their response to Sandy Hook which was "put armed police officers in every school" while blaming music videos and video games., no that definitely didn't happen. Although it did and it sure seems a lot like "moar guns!"

Or their response to Virgina Tech which was "put armed security guards in schools" and then later attack the relatives of the victims because they advocated for gun control.

And of course, the NRA itself and its political lobbying arm "the NRA Institute for Legislative Action" would never take money from the firearms industry, now would they? Oh wait... they do.

And let's not mention how the NRA - after every single fucking one of these tragedies - insists "it's not time to talk about gun control - let the victims grieve". Shortly after which, they induce a panic that "the Democrats are going to take everyone's guns" so the idiot men-children of the NRA will go out and buy more weapons. Which they do. Because they're easily led.

Also, could you explain to me why the NRA wants suspected terrorists to be able to buy guns?. Just a quick explanation of why the guys we won't let on planes should be able to buy assault weapons. C'mon dude, that should be an easy one.

quote:


Please provide links to their lies and propaganda as well. I know leftist fascists say that is so, but I've never seen it proven as more than leftist koolaide BS. So, have you been at the koolaide?

Look, it's your own Wayne La Pierre who insists “only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun", despite a study of active shootings between 2002 and 2013 showing that in only 3.1% of cases did intervention by armed individuals who were not law enforcement actually end the incident. That's less than the success rate by unarmed citizens (13.1%) and much less than the shooter ending the incident through suicide (23.1%). The idea that armed citizens are .
to prevent shootings is a fucking fantasy.

Had enough? Because these fucking clowns have hung themselves over and over again and anyone who really thinks the NRA is not a tool of the firearm manufacturers is clearly two sandwiches short of a picnic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

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.

Jesus Christ, what do you call a "high-powered weapon"? Does it have to fire a .50 anti-materiel round before you'll concede it's "high-powered"?

Fuck a duck, you gun nuts really do tie your sense of manhood to your weapons. It's pathetic.

The .223 is not considered a powerful enough round to go deer hunting in most states.
The projectile is much smaller than most hunting rounds. In this respect it would even ranks behind the 30-30, a round developed in the 19th century.
You don't even understand the terms of the debate.
Any thing beyond a 30-06 woud be a high powered rifle.
Since you don't shoot you have no way of knowing how little relative power the .223 has so why don't you just keep quite and learn somthing.

Well, obviously: the .223 is clearly a harmless round that bounced off everybody it was shot at in that night club, didn't it? Barely even a bullet at all...

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Two when they aren't in gun free zones the armed citizens stop it before it becomes news worthy.