Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: AND WHY ?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: AND WHY ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 11:06:13 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

But what they fail to remember that powder acuated guns are used in the home and work construction and fabrication. They also have pneumatic, hydraulic, and electrical acuated weapons.


So, all the nations that have very very low gun mortality don't have pneumatic, hydraulic, and electrical actuated weapons? Your statement is silly. The one big obvious undeniable variable is the availability of guns.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 11:21:35 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
What I don't understand, and I seriously doubt that anyone can explain, is our friends want us to rid ourselves of guns.

Actually Ken, we don't.
That's what all the gun nuts seem to parrot when these debates are running.
We DON'T want you to get rid of your guns.
What we (generally) advocate is a much stricter regime of owning them and where you can legally take/use them.



_____________________________

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 1:59:30 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"Of the largest mass shootings in US history, all but two were committed by people being treated for various mental and emotional conditions that would have blocked them from purchasing guns IF THEY HAD BEEN REPORTED to the authorities. "

And treated HOW ? With psychotropic drugs.

Before those drugs came along people had all kinds of guns and there were few shootings. you could get the registration for your car out of the glove box and the cop could see your gu and ot say a word, but back then they could shoot...

What has changed is the people. And the drugs. I don't know about you, but the only things I want modifying my mood or whatever are pot and alcohol and I accept those because I have plenty of experience with them and know EXACTLY what they do to me and how much. But now the put kids on Ritalin instead of teaching them. Bottom line is sometimes you have to smack them, but that is rare if you have done it right up to that point in time.

AND WHY ? Yeah, and why do these foreigners think they know what is best for us ? I am starting to think they are jealous. What other reason could they have for harping on it time after time after time after time ? Do they possibly want to come here and stab us ? Do they want us to disarm and become the sheeple they are ? Do they want us to stop "defending" their countries' governments so they can dig up their hidden guns and depose the US friendly regime ?

Do you see USians commenting on their rights ? Do you see USians commenting (unsolicited) on their crime rates ? Traffic laws ? Politicians ? these motherfuckers presume to tell us how to vote.

The founders of this country came here to get away from people like that. And they are so brainwashed they don't even understand that is why we do not adopt their ways. WE DO NOT WANT THEM. I do not care if a fucking million people get shot every year, I ain't changing my mind.

Just like this Aussie on Usenet who keeps putting Trump down. What the fuck is it to him ? And what's more I have told him more than once that even if Trump gets caught fucking a ten year old I will not vote for Clinton. Or something like that.

But they never stop, they think repeating it enough times will make us believe it. Repeat a lie enough times and people start to believe it, I believe was written. It has been falsely attributed to a Nazi but that's not really where it came from though I don't remember right now I am not looking it up.

When they say give up the gins that means they are saying "Better to need it and not have it". there is no fucking logic in the world that can prove that. What they mean is to make everyone vulnerable, like little old Ladies ans whatever, completely and PROVEN vulnerable to any thug want to rob, rape, or torture, or whatever some sick motherfucker wants to do. And the most heinous of crimes against only one or two people have been Black on White. Unarmed Whites. In their own homes. For days. Not that there were that many of them but still. They don't make the news.

Blacks killing, raping, stealing is not news ?

What does that tell you ? Think about it.

T^T

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:01:59 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"Now another big point the liberals like to make is that "less than 1% of Muslims in the world commit acts of terror, therefore it is wrong to condemn or punish the entire Muslim population."

Fine and dandy, but when a gun is used in a crime, lets punish all gun owners because if they own a gun, they have to be guilty. "


I am the game warden here and you are hereby busted for trying to put logic to liberals.

Don't you know it gives them a headache ?

T^T

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:05:38 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"jlf1961 they cannot be safely owned by mere human plebs. More guns begat more death and carnage. But if someone would like to tell me where gun laws are akin to America - then we could look at the death and carnage dispairty between these two gun toting nations."

So YOU are saying that if YOU owned a gun YOU would go out and shoot people because they made you angry or something and therefore YOU assume everyone is just like YOU ?

If you had a gun would you just shoot people when you got pissed off at them ? Well if you did that here, someone else would shoot you, which is how it should be.

T^T

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:10:02 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

Real0ne that is not what freedomwarf1 said now is it and you fine well know it. Do you own guns real0ne I am curious.

jlf1961 3% own 50%9(265-300mill) I read that the other day to nail a bit more clarity that figure I sometimes use on other threads.

The carnage via guns in America is bewildering and exceeds almost all nations remind me never to go to Honduras

jlf1961 they cannot be safely owned by mere human plebs. More guns begat more death and carnage. But if someone would like to tell me where gun laws are akin to America - then we could look at the death and carnage dispairty between these two gun toting nations.

Thank you for confirming my demigod status.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:18:58 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"Clearly, the availability of guns is the major issue. Putting the blame on the privacy of mental health records is a strawman."

Bullshit on the first part. You used to be able to go into Sears and buy guns with cash and no ID or anything. Well maybe not Sears but alot of places. And there were ZERO school shootings, or mall shootings, anything of the sort. If anything they were MORE available. Order by mail just send a check. They were so fucking easy to get it was ridiculous and there were no mass shootings.

And I think I got a workaround for the doctor patient privilege thing. Pharmaceutical records. If anyone is on certain drugs, no new guns for them. Not that they can't buy one in a bar or something but carrying it means, in this state anyway, having a firearm under disability, which means legal disability. In someone's own house I am for zero restrictions. If he lives alone who cares, if he lives with others ad scares them then they put him in jail.

But drugstore records are not all that highly protected by law so you can find out that way.

"And, if seven million guns are stolen each year it may be due in some part to the irresponsibility of gun owners."

While true, seven out of three hundred is how much ? That is no reason to take away everyone's rights.

T^T

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:27:54 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

But what they fail to remember that powder acuated guns are used in the home and work construction and fabrication. They also have pneumatic, hydraulic, and electrical acuated weapons.


So, all the nations that have very very low gun mortality don't have pneumatic, hydraulic, and electrical actuated weapons? Your statement is silly. The one big obvious undeniable variable is the availability of guns.


No, what they don't have is the fucked in the head people put on some strange drug they don't even know the effects of instead of getting good counseling.

They don't have people not raised right, who were mentally abused be Parents who were too fucking immature to have kids. They don't have kids who commit suicide over a Facebook post. They got a little more sense than that.

but all that sense does not tell them that the lack of guns is not what caused them to have a better society, it is that they have better people. the stupid motherfuckers have no idea how it is here.

Yet they know what is best for us. Fukum.

T^T

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:31:26 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"What we (generally) advocate is a much stricter regime of owning them and where you can legally take/use them. "

You are ten fucking thousand miles away. It is none of your fucking business. We understand if we visit your country we are not allowed to bring them. Why isn't that good enough for you ?

I know the US government sticks its ose into everybody's business, but We The People do not.

T^T

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:42:19 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
pour forth reality all above me with reality

Begin?

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:42:30 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
Aand 'We the people' are killing each other at an alarming rate compared to every other first-world country.

_____________________________

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:43:03 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Of the largest mass shootings in US history, all but two were committed by people being treated for various mental and emotional conditions that would have blocked them from purchasing guns IF THEY HAD BEEN REPORTED to the authorities.

Maybe so, but without access to guns those troubled people would probably not have been able to commit mass murders.

In the United States, the death rate from gun homicides is about 31 per million people — the equivalent of 27 people shot dead every day of the year.

In other countries the rate is about one or two per million.

Clearly, the availability of guns is the major issue. Putting the blame on the privacy of mental health records is a strawman.

And, if seven million guns are stolen each year it may be due in some part to the irresponsibility of gun owners.



What part of "IF their mental condition had been reported to authorities would have preventing them from legally buying guns" do you not grasp?


Federal law prohibits the purchase and possession of firearms by people who fall within certain categories, such as convicted felons, domestic abusers, and people with specific kinds of mental health histories.1 Although background checks have prevented over two million people in these categories from obtaining guns,2 the federal law does not generally include other types of people identified by public health researchers as being at a significantly higher risk than the general population of being dangerous,
including:

Those who have been convicted of violent or gun-related misdemeanors;3
Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs4;
Those convicted of juvenile offenses;5 and
Additional people who have suffered from severe mental illness.6


That is the law, the classes of people who cannot legally purchase firearms.

Now, the mandatory back ground check should show those things up except:

1) Mental health professionals are not REQUIRED by ANY LAW to report those patients who suffer from the disqualifying conditions. In other words, unless they walk in and admit to having a disqualifying condition, there is no record of it outside the fucking doctor's office.

See a problem there?

2) State and local law enforcement agencies are not required to report any law violations to the national database that is used in the back ground checks. It is purely voluntary.

So the first two again are hit and miss, and only if some agency decides to put it into the database.


So, your solution Vincent is to make it illegal for anyone to purchase a gun regardless of their lack of criminal, mental or whatever disqualifiers?

So, I guess if one of your children breaks a rule, you punish all of them, even if they were not involved right?


I take it that you are not a real good student of history.

I suggest you look at the acts of parliament that directly led to the revolution.

But let me give you a few hints.

In South Carolina, the British army confiscated gun powder in private warehouses to keep it out of colonists hands.
In New England, british troops confiscated firearms, shot and powder.

That is the primary reason for the 2nd amendment.

But then lets look at some modern history.

When the Nazis came to power in Germany, one of the first things done was to make firearms illegal.

Stalin came to power and did the same thing, what followed was his famous purges, officials and soviet citizens that protested his programs.

Do I disagree that there is a problem with gun related crime in the US, no, there is a major problem with gun related crime in the US.

However, considering that there are laws that would eliminate most of the gun related crimes you people scream about, IF YOU PEOPLE WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BE ENFORCED AND GIVE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE TOOLS TO DO JUST THAT.

I think it is ludicrous to believe a gun ban would work. I mean the prohibition of alcohol worked wonders, didnt it? The ban on drugs has worked out real well.

Just how effective has that $3.9 billion dollars spent last year on preventing drugs from getting into the country been?

How effective was the hundreds of millions spent during prohibition keeping booze out of the country?

How effective are the billions spent on keeping illegal aliens out of the country been?`

Now, let me explain the problems with a full gun ban, aside from the fact it just wont work.

AK knockoffs are being produced by the millions in back alley shops from India to Africa. They are not complicated to make.

I can make a 9mm sten submachine gun in my barn.

I can go to a buddy's machine shop and mill every part for an AK, AR series rifle in about 3 hours. I can make the tools to rifle the barrel in the same time.

If I really wanted to, I could machine the parts for anything from a WW 2 BAR to a 50 cal machine gun or a 30 cal 1919, or a 7.7mm minigun.

Why? Because all I have to do is download the specs off the internet and then convert them to a CAD/CAM program.

So, to ban guns in the US (a country notorious for breaking bans to begin with) you are going to have to restrict internet access, regulate machine shops to the point of having cops in every one of them 24/7, only because there is no way to tell who's machine shop produced what.

And all of that is dependent on IF you can get the people owning the 300 million plus legally owned guns to give them up.

And before you can even approach confiscation, you will have to have the 2nd amendment taken out of the constitution.

And should that happen, what is to stop someone at a future date deciding we dont need the rest of the amendments?

So, what is the solution?

Make it possible for the fucking gun regulations to fucking work and quite being all or nothing jackasses about gun control.

Because there is one thing an Executive order cannot do, and that is supersede the Constitution. FDR tried it and the Supreme Court kicked a lot of his executive order programs out the door as unconstitutional.

Before him, Lincoln did it, and again the Supreme Court shut his executive order down.

The funniest thing around is a Liberal saying that they support the constitution, and in the same breath talk about infringing on the second amendment.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 2:43:51 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
I excuse wicked
why he us 100% genuine CFS/ME 3 cats and the rest ahahahaha

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 3:03:02 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
What I don't understand, and I seriously doubt that anyone can explain, is our friends want us to rid ourselves of guns.

Actually Ken, we don't.
That's what all the gun nuts seem to parrot when these debates are running.
We DON'T want you to get rid of your guns.
What we (generally) advocate is a much stricter regime of owning them and where you can legally take/use them.





Freedom,

There are very strict gun laws in the US.

However, as I have pointed out many a time, the classes of citizens that would be prevented from gun ownership are not prevented from gun ownership because the tools that would prevent them are not being used.

Or to put it another way.


A person who has repeatedly been convicted of drunk driving loses his license, and is prevented by law from ever getting another license. Under the federal law that makes reporting this mandatory to a nationwide database, that individual cannot just move to another state and get a license.

He is barred from getting a driver's license in every state.

Why, because he gets drunk, gets behind the wheel of his car and endangers other citizens.

A very good idea, dont you agree?

However, the database that SHOULD have information about a persons violent crime history, the fact he/she has protective orders against them, or the fact they suffer from a mental or emotional condition in which violence is a normal occurrence does not have the same mandatory reporting requirement.

As far as the mental/emotional health rider, it is not even mandatory for doctors or mental health institutions to report such determinations to the authorities.

See a problem here?

And you want to guess who is the ones preventing this information from being mandatory? The same idiots who want to ban guns.

What is even funnier, is that the party that came up with those regulations is the party that now has all the people wanting to ban guns.

The are also the same people who preach the "Only a few Muslims are terrorists so you cannot blame all Muslims" but by god you can blame all gun owners for the even lower percentage of gun owners who commit crimes with guns (of which most of them could not legally buy a gun if the fucking information was available.)

These are also the same idiots who do not like the idea of mandatory minimum sentences for people who use a gun in commission of a crime.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 3:29:10 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Of the largest mass shootings in US history, all but two were committed by people being treated for various mental and emotional conditions that would have blocked them from purchasing guns IF THEY HAD BEEN REPORTED to the authorities.

Maybe so, but without access to guns those troubled people would probably not have been able to commit mass murders.

In the United States, the death rate from gun homicides is about 31 per million people — the equivalent of 27 people shot dead every day of the year.

In other countries the rate is about one or two per million.

Clearly, the availability of guns is the major issue. Putting the blame on the privacy of mental health records is a strawman.

And, if seven million guns are stolen each year it may be due in some part to the irresponsibility of gun owners.

People shouldn't have guns to defend themselves, they should put their safety in the hands of the cops who are out to murder people?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 3:37:48 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Maybe thats what Scott believed...
He was living in an open carry state....
Maybe he thought the cops were out to murder him, of course they were in plain clothes and in an unmarked car....god forbid he should attempt to defend himself, he should know the difference between good cops and cops who are "in fear " for their lives.
what are these black people thinking!!!!

how dare they be scared. Nah not scared, whats the word??? defiant???




_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 3:40:40 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Because, despite the rest of the world proving that less guns is better and safer, they believe it is their god-given right to bear arms.


If the conditions in any other country are not the same as in the US, with only the allowing of gun ownership being the difference, then any claim that the US's violence rates will drop with guns being out of the equation are, at the very least, conjecture, and little more than a shitty hypothesis at the very best.

https://youtu.be/pELwCqz2JfE

I like Whittle's final line of analysis: [paraphrased] Maybe it's not the guns, but the people holding the guns.


Most of us 'anti-gun' people aren't arguing the violence rates - just the easy deaths caused by guns, or more precisely, the prolific ownership and use of such.

Even if the level of violence were identical, the country with a gun ownership culture will have many more deaths than the one without such an in-grained culture.

And whilst gun nuts seem to think we advocate banning guns, actually we don't.
Many so-called 'gun free' countries still have guns, but the laws aren't quite so liberal and lax.
That's where the difference lies, not the banning of guns per se.


Can an idividual own a hand gun?
Can an idividual keep what guns you allow in their homes and loaded?
Does your law recognize such a thing as dgu?
You say that the law cuts down on firearm ownership, doesn't that mean that you ban them from the majority of people.
Don't you have to prove a "need" for a firearm to the satisfaction of someone who's job it is to keep firearm ownership down to "reasonable" levels?
Don't we have a constitutionally garaunteed right to own a firearm unless the government can find a specific reason why a specific individual cannot own one.
Don't you understand that when the citizen has to prove a need it is an oppressive government and when it onus is on the government to prove why, not some people, but each individual, cannot exercise an action it is freer.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 4:05:31 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"The are also the same people who preach the "Only a few Muslims are terrorists so you cannot blame all Muslims" but by god you can blame all gun owners for the even lower percentage of gun owners who commit crimes with guns (of which most of them could not legally buy a gun if the fucking information was available.) "

I TOLD YOU TO QUIT CONFUSING LIBERALS WITH LOGIC !

If you don't stop, the rangers and cops and everyone from California are going to send thousands of troops and one of your Texas Rangers is going to have to kill them. Do you have any idea what that is going to cost in ammunition ? Your state has almost 10 % of the debt of California. WILL SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN ! ?

T^T

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 6:39:12 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Does your law recognize such a thing as dgu?


I doubt I would recognize a dgu if I saw one. Are they like wildebeests?

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/25/2016 6:47:43 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

People shouldn't have guns to defend themselves, they should put their safety in the hands of the cops who are out to murder people?


Guns in the home do more harm than good.

It is a myth that guns have been successfully used for self-defense except rarely.

Check it out. There is one flawed, decades old study out there.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: AND WHY ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.113