RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms.

RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms.

30 days

5% (1)

1 year

0% (0)

2-5 years

5% (1)

6-10 years

0% (0)

more than ten years

88% (16)

Total Votes : 18

(last vote on : 10/31/2016 2:01:17 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

BamaD -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 1:21:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx I have pointed out to you before that cuba has very little gun violence. In amerika gun owners make up only about a third of the population. In contrast virtually everyone in cuba is armed. It would seem pretty obvious that gun ownership alone is not a fair qualifier for gun violence. What would seem more likely would be the mindset of the gun owners and their projected fears/paranoia regarding the "need" for a gun. If we look at the posters here who perpetually bleat about their need seem to fear the minorities who historically have been oppressed and the government who until relatively recently have prevented those minorities from possessing guns. And many would argue that Cuba is a tiny country of less than 12 million people, an island, ruled with an iron fist of the commies followed by Castro. That aside, I do agree that it is the mindset of Americans that are causing the problem. It also shows that very strict gun controls, if applied nationwide, do work remarkably well. If only we had the good sense, like Cuba, to install a dictator to rule us.

dcnovice -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 1:21:21 PM)
FR 4 years, 7 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 13 hours, 42 minutes. +/- 37 seconds

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 1:39:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx That aside, I do agree that it is the mindset of Americans that are causing the problem. Since you have just agreed that it is attitude and not guns that is the problem may we expect that from now forward you will stop calling for the repeal of the 2nd ammendment and the limiting of gun ownership in my country? Since when have I called for the repeal of the 2nd??? I do believe that stricter gun controls, or more exactly, the stricter enforcement of them, would make the US a better and safer place. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx It also shows that very strict gun controls, if applied nationwide, do work remarkably well. No it does not. I said nothing of the sort. You have pulled that turd straight out of your ass. And I never said that you'd said that. Jeeez, you like to twist words as bad as bama does. So that turd came straight from you, not me. And some Cuban gun facts - The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Cuba is 2.0 firearms per 100 people (2%). The regulation of guns in Cuba is categorised as restrictive. Guns in Cuba are regulated by the National Revolutionary Police, the Ministry of the Interior, and the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (not the government). In Cuba, the right to private gun ownership is not guaranteed by law. In Cuba, civilians are not allowed to possess pen guns, cane rifles, rifles with a calibre greater than 5.6 millimetres, machine and sub-machine guns of any kind, home-made firearms, shortened shotguns, firearms that have been modified with devices to make them more efficient, and certain types of ammunition. An applicant for a firearm licence in Cuba must pass a background check which considers criminal, mental health, health, and addiction records. In Cuba, an understanding of firearm safety and the law, tested in a theoretical and/or practical training course is required for a firearm licence. In Cuba, gun owners must re-apply and re-qualify for their firearm licence every ten years. Licensed firearm owners in Cuba are permitted to possess one firearm per licence for personal defence. So despite your assertion that "All of them have guns while only about a third of amerikans have guns" and that "Consider also that the constitution of cuba authorizes the people to overthrow the government anytime it is less than responsive to the constitution. How many countries in the world put that in their constitution and then arm the citizens with the firepower to do it?" and also "I have pointed out to you before that cuba has very little gun violence. In amerika gun owners make up only about a third of the population. In contrast virtually everyone in cuba is armed. It would seem pretty obvious that gun ownership alone is not a fair qualifier for gun violence"- you are plain wrong on your facts. If a third of Americans (33%) own firearms and only 2% of Cubans own firearms, it is no wonder that Cuba has a lower gun tally than the US. As I have said to you, American prolific gun ownership and lack of enforcement and control is a significant contributing factor in US gun violence. Pointing to Cuba as a like-for-like comparison is a red herring. Cuba is much more regulated and like the other OECD countries than the US. So heavy control of firearms is indeed a major factor of reducing gun crimes and gun violence.

Chaska -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 2:08:34 PM)
My dear fellow Gun Nutters™. Today I have some good news for y’all! Just stop ‘n think about this for one darn cotton picking minute, if’n ya will… Even if the friggin skaredycat libtards out there take way our guns, we Gun Nutters™ will still have access to hammers, which our good friends at the NRA sez are responsible for more deaths in the US than sum guns! (So that means they must be purty awesome weapons, rite?) Matta o’ fact, did y’all know that even as I write this here letter ta y’all there are hundreds o’ thousands, probably even millions, o’ semiautomatic hammers available in this great nayshun o’ ours? Oh sure, they don’t call em that, they call em “nail guns”. Sounds harmless, rite? But don’t be fooled, these so-called nail guns are really semiautomatic hammers (‘n with the rite knowhow ‘n a little bit a tinkering could even be converted to fully automatic hammers). And while so far there have only been a few fatalities from semiautomatic hammers, it is a fact that across the nayshun some 37,000 people have to go to to hospital emergency rooms each year due to serious injuries from these (potenshilly) lethal weapons. And y’all should check this one out rite quicklike; ya can own as many o’ these semiautomatic hammers as y’all want! All ya have to do’s go down to yer local hardware store where’n they‘s freely sold over the counter ‘n ya can buy one on the spot, no kwestyuns asked or background check rekwired. (I ask y’all, “How awesome is that?”) And so I say to all ma feller Gun Nutter™ friends, I sez, “If’n thay take our semiautomatic rifles way frum us don’t worry bout it, we’ll still have our semiautomatic hammers ‘n I know tha tha friggin libtard carpenter’s unions will see ta it that we nevah lose those”. Anyways, hope this here news helps ease any anxiety y’all might be havin bout losin the luv of yer lives, sose y’all can rest easy now ‘n have a good day. Cheers!

thompsonx -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 2:09:42 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD Still can't read can you. He also stated that those dregs who originally went to Australia were prisoners, so they were under tight control. Georgia was also a penal colony dumbass. How many prisoners went to oz how many went to georgia over how long of period of time? Do you just open your moouth to change feet? The early governors were strict and had tight control as well. Just the same in amerika. Try to remember it was the same england sending the jailbirds to both places? They were given their independence, we threw you bozos out so we started from a completely different place. Did they teach you that at the university of dumbass? The history books are pretty clear that it was the frenchies who did the tossing of the britts and that georgie& co. were also rans. Your argument works great, unless you think about it. Your arguement does not work at all. Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

BamaD -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 2:16:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx That aside, I do agree that it is the mindset of Americans that are causing the problem. Since you have just agreed that it is attitude and not guns that is the problem may we expect that from now forward you will stop calling for the repeal of the 2nd ammendment and the limiting of gun ownership in my country? Since when have I called for the repeal of the 2nd??? I do believe that stricter gun controls, or more exactly, the stricter enforcement of them, would make the US a better and safer place. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx It also shows that very strict gun controls, if applied nationwide, do work remarkably well. No it does not. I said nothing of the sort. You have pulled that turd straight out of your ass. And I never said that you'd said that. Jeeez, you like to twist words as bad as bama does. So that turd came straight from you, not me. And some Cuban gun facts - The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Cuba is 2.0 firearms per 100 people (2%). The regulation of guns in Cuba is categorised as restrictive. Guns in Cuba are regulated by the National Revolutionary Police, the Ministry of the Interior, and the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (not the government). In Cuba, the right to private gun ownership is not guaranteed by law. In Cuba, civilians are not allowed to possess pen guns, cane rifles, rifles with a calibre greater than 5.6 millimetres, machine and sub-machine guns of any kind, home-made firearms, shortened shotguns, firearms that have been modified with devices to make them more efficient, and certain types of ammunition. An applicant for a firearm licence in Cuba must pass a background check which considers criminal, mental health, health, and addiction records. In Cuba, an understanding of firearm safety and the law, tested in a theoretical and/or practical training course is required for a firearm licence. In Cuba, gun owners must re-apply and re-qualify for their firearm licence every ten years. Licensed firearm owners in Cuba are permitted to possess one firearm per licence for personal defence. So despite your assertion that "All of them have guns while only about a third of amerikans have guns" and that "Consider also that the constitution of cuba authorizes the people to overthrow the government anytime it is less than responsive to the constitution. How many countries in the world put that in their constitution and then arm the citizens with the firepower to do it?" and also "I have pointed out to you before that cuba has very little gun violence. In amerika gun owners make up only about a third of the population. In contrast virtually everyone in cuba is armed. It would seem pretty obvious that gun ownership alone is not a fair qualifier for gun violence"- you are plain wrong on your facts. If a third of Americans (33%) own firearms and only 2% of Cubans own firearms, it is no wonder that Cuba has a lower gun tally than the US. As I have said to you, American prolific gun ownership and lack of enforcement and control is a significant contributing factor in US gun violence. Pointing to Cuba as a like-for-like comparison is a red herring. Cuba is much more regulated and like the other OECD countries than the US. So heavy control of firearms is indeed a major factor of reducing gun crimes and gun violence. It is quite possible that you have never used the phrase repeal the 2nd amendment but you have told us twice how we would be better off in Castro's Cuba because a dictator like that would strictly enforce gun laws. Do you not comprehend that the 2nd is there , in part to prevent a dictator like him. Surely you are not stupid enough to think that the laws you want can be passed without ignoring the 2nd or, as has been done with the 10th redefining it out of existence. Or is it just that you think Americans are stupid enough to fall for this song an dance?

Chaska -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 2:30:12 PM)
Make your own Gun Free Zone

vincentML -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 2:32:55 PM)
quote: No but she does want justices who will rule that the right to bear arms is not an individual right. Give me a link to Hillary saying that.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 2:37:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD It is quite possible that you have never used the phrase repeal the 2nd amendment but you have told us twice how we would be better off in Castro's Cuba because a dictator like that would strictly enforce gun laws. Do you not comprehend that the 2nd is there , in part to prevent a dictator like him. Surely you are not stupid enough to think that the laws you want can be passed without ignoring the 2nd or, as has been done with the 10th redefining it out of existence. Or is it just that you think Americans are stupid enough to fall for this song an dance? And where have I said, or implied, that you'd be better off with a dictator, let alone one like Castro?? I haven't. Not even close. You do have a bad habit of putting in words that were never said. And yes, I am fully aware of why the 2nd came into being. At the time, it was useful and was relevant. My PoV is that it has long since outlived its usefulness in these modern days. If the government decided to do things with citizens that they didn't like, there's not a snowballs chance that citizen-owned weapons, and militias, are going to out-fight the US military or even close to it. So the fundamental purpose of the 2nd is pretty much moot these days. Pea-shooters against a nuclear tank; pretty futile. But, as I have constantly argued, we don't advocate banning guns but simply put sensible gun restraints into law and enforce it rigidly. Currently, you (the US) are lacking both.

Chaska -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:13:45 PM)
Is your gubbint tellin the truth or... Comparing crime rates between America and Britain is fundamentally flawed. In America, a gun crime is recorded as a gun crime. In Britain, a crime is only recorded when there is a final disposition (a conviction). All unsolved gun crimes in Britain are not reported as gun crimes, grossly undercounting the amount of gun crime there. To make matters worse, British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:15:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaska British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism. Got a cite for that??

BamaD -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:16:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD It is quite possible that you have never used the phrase repeal the 2nd amendment but you have told us twice how we would be better off in Castro's Cuba because a dictator like that would strictly enforce gun laws. Do you not comprehend that the 2nd is there , in part to prevent a dictator like him. Surely you are not stupid enough to think that the laws you want can be passed without ignoring the 2nd or, as has been done with the 10th redefining it out of existence. Or is it just that you think Americans are stupid enough to fall for this song an dance? And where have I said, or implied, that you'd be better off with a dictator, let alone one like Castro?? I haven't. Not even close. You do have a bad habit of putting in words that were never said. And yes, I am fully aware of why the 2nd came into being. At the time, it was useful and was relevant. My PoV is that it has long since outlived its usefulness in these modern days. If the government decided to do things with citizens that they didn't like, there's not a snowballs chance that citizen-owned weapons, and militias, are going to out-fight the US military or even close to it. So the fundamental purpose of the 2nd is pretty much moot these days. Pea-shooters against a nuclear tank; pretty futile. But, as I have constantly argued, we don't advocate banning guns but simply put sensible gun restraints into law and enforce it rigidly. Currently, you (the US) are lacking both. So you admit that while you haven't used the words repeal the 2nd you do think we should either repeal or ignore it. And you did use Cuba and their strict control as a good example of what is needed is strong leadership and control as he has, and unless you are stupid you know that it would take a dictator like that to do it. And your idea of "senseble" is merely the bleating of sheep who put their lives in the hands of their betters in the ruling class. A

thompsonx -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:21:02 PM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 ORIGINAL: thompsonx That aside, I do agree that it is the mindset of Americans that are causing the problem. Since you have just agreed that it is attitude and not guns that is the problem may we expect that from now forward you will stop calling for the repeal of the 2nd ammendment and the limiting of gun ownership in my country? Since when have I called for the repeal of the 2nd??? In virtually every gun thread you have sought the eviseration of the 2nd ammendment. That eviseration does in fact eliminate the 2nd without the process of an ammendment. I do believe that stricter gun controls, or more exactly, the stricter enforcement of them, would make the US a better and safer place. Please enumerate your desires so that we may not be mistaken about what you desire for my country. It also shows that very strict gun controls, if applied nationwide, do work remarkably well. No it does not. I said nothing of the sort. You have pulled that turd straight out of your ass. And I never said that you'd said that. Well then just where did you get "It also shows that very strict gun controls, if applied nationwide, do work remarkably well." Which "it" are you referencing here? And some Cuban gun facts - The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Cuba is 2.0 firearms per 100 people (2%). Estimated???that means a guess not a fact. Perhaps instead of relying on a guess we use facts. are you good with that or would you prefer to guess? My link at the end of this post will give you some facts so you will not have to guess...unless guessing is your preference. Since the weapons issued by the government are government weapons issued to all citizens {the peoples revolutionary militia} they would not be considered private. now would they. If you had bothered to read the link you provided you would have noticed that part. The regulation of guns in Cuba is categorised as restrictive. Guns in Cuba are regulated by the National Revolutionary Police, the Ministry of the Interior, and the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (not the government). How is it possible for the national revolutionary police,the ministry of the interior and the ministry of the revolutionary armed forces to not be part of the government? In Cuba, the right to private gun ownership is not guaranteed by law. You might want to lok at chapter 1 article 3 of the cuban constitution it would disagree with your opinion. In Cuba, civilians are not allowed to possess pen guns, cane rifles, These are illegal in most jurisdictions in amerika also rifles with a calibre greater than 5.6 millimetres, That is a larger caliber than an ar "assault rifle" machine and sub-machine guns of any kind, Those are also prohibited in amerika but supplied free of charge along with ammo to the cuban people by the cuban government. home-made firearms, shortened shotguns, firearms that have been modified with devices to make them more efficient, and certain types of ammunition. An applicant for a firearm licence in Cuba must pass a background check which considers criminal, mental health, health, and addiction records. In Cuba, an understanding of firearm safety and the law, tested in a theoretical and/or practical training course is required for a firearm licence. Just like in amerika In Cuba, gun owners must re-apply and re-qualify for their firearm licence every ten years. Licensed firearm owners in Cuba are permitted to possess one firearm per licence for personal defence. Multiple licenses equals multiple guns. Pretty much like in amerika. So despite your assertion that "All of them have guns while only about a third of amerikans have guns" and that "Consider also that the constitution of cuba authorizes the people to overthrow the government anytime it is less than responsive to the constitution. How many countries in the world put that in their constitution and then arm the citizens with the firepower to do it?" and also "I have pointed out to you before that cuba has very little gun violence. In amerika gun owners make up only about a third of the population. In contrast virtually everyone in cuba is armed. It would seem pretty obvious that gun ownership alone is not a fair qualifier for gun violence"- you are plain wrong on your facts. So far my facts seem to be standing and your opinions are still opinions. If a third of Americans (33%) own firearms and only 2% of Cubans own firearms, The only difference is that in cuba the government supplies the guns and ammo and in amerika the citizens have to buy their own. it is no wonder that Cuba has a lower gun tally than the US. The facts still remain that everyone in cuba has a gun issued by the government. (Of course they do not give guns to the insane, the feeble minded or criminals) As I have said to you, American prolific gun ownership and lack of enforcement and control is a significant contributing factor in US gun violence. As I have just proved to you it is attitude and not the presence of guns that is the determining factor. Pointing to Cuba as a like-for-like comparison is a red herring. Not a red herring just your ignorance of the laws of cuba. Cuba is much more regulated and like the other OECD countries than the US. As has been shown that is not the case. Private gunownership is no more restrictive in cuba than in amerika. In addition the government issues guns and ammo to all citizens with the above noted exceptions So heavy control of firearms is indeed a major factor of reducing gun crimes and gun violence. Thus far the facts contradict your opinion. Since you were reluctant to actually read your own cite I will provide another which may be more easily navigated and has larger type. Most of this, without the socialist rhetoric, is available on the site you provided but you have to click on each specific link to read them. https://return2source.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/castro-didnt-take-the-guns-alex-jones-guns-socialism/

BamaD -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:25:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: No but she does want justices who will rule that the right to bear arms is not an individual right. Give me a link to Hillary saying that. That is part and parcel of both Heller and McDonald, or don't you know enough about them to know that. An I have given you cites to show she wants them overturned.

thompsonx -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:28:44 PM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 And yes, I am fully aware of why the 2nd came into being. You amerikans have no clue as to the why of the 2nd ammendment At the time, it was useful and was relevant. Only if you were a slave owner. If I were a slave owner and you were my slave would you come to work tomorrow morning if I did not have a gun? http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:38:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD So you admit that while you haven't used the words repeal the 2nd you do think we should either repeal or ignore it. Nope. Try reading the words I typed, not those in your mind. quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And you did use Cuba and their strict control as a good example of what is needed is strong leadership and control as he has, and unless you are stupid you know that it would take a dictator like that to do it. And do any of the OECD countries have a dictator to achieve that?? No. None of them do. And if you had any reading comprehension, my retort about Cuba was in response to thompson's errata. quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And your idea of "senseble" is merely the bleating of sheep who put their lives in the hands of their betters in the ruling class. And many of us living in the OECD countries do not live like sheep in the hands of "ruling classes". We all have elections just like you do. As usual, wrong again.

Chaska -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:39:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: Chaska British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism. Got a cite for that?? Gotta cite to disprove it?

Curmudgeonly1 -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:45:12 PM)
It's a bit naive to compare 'America's situation with any country. Conditions in Argentina are quite different to those in Mexico or Honduras f'rinstance. It seem silly to lump them all together. [8D]

BamaD -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:50:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curmudgeonly1 It's a bit naive to compare 'America's situation with any country. Conditions in Argentina are quite different to those in Mexico or Honduras f'rinstance. It seem silly to lump them all together. [8D] Of course it is, but why should that stop them.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. (10/23/2016 3:51:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaska quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: Chaska British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism. Got a cite for that?? Gotta cite to disprove it? You made the challenge, it's on you to back it up with some facts.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.078125