"Maybe if the wackjob in Tuscon only had 6 bullets available, there would be a lot less than 6 dead and 14 wounded people."
Breaking :
01/18/2011- This just in ............Children that play in the highway have a greater chance of being run over by a car, than ones that play in their own backyard ............
"Maybe if the wackjob in Tuscon only had 6 bullets available, there would be a lot less than 6 dead and 14 wounded people."
Breaking :
01/18/2011- This just in ............Children that play in the highway have a greater chance of being run over by a car, than ones that play in their own backyard ............
Anent, not ridiculous I only stated the obvious ...like the statement I quoted ...
But the same results could have happened in Arizona had the shooter had two guns, that held less ammo ...No ?
The firearm or any type of firearm is not the blame ,,it's the man holding the firearm ..in this case an imbicile....making laws and placing restrictions on guns,only restricts the law-abiding citizen.
The 2nd Amendment :
When they tell you..,you don't need it...that's when you need it ..........
Anent
I got in to a heated debate with the poster straightshooter on the legality of firearms in cities specifically. But it ended up going nowhere as he cannot debate without clamining he's up 56-3 with his backups in depicting an imaginary football game of some sort.
Anyhow, the primary point concerning gun laws is this. The purchase of a firearm should be the most difficult purchase in America. The background check should be extensive, intrusive, and exhaustive
Because statistics show that there are more gun homicides in areas with less strict gun laws.
Oh so I guess you are in favor of amending the Bill of Rights.
Americans have the right to bear arms. Not the right, after a bunch of nonsense. The right to bear arms means just that.
Our forefathers were far wiser than any of you trying to "tweak" our bill of rights.
Anent
I got in to a heated debate with the poster straightshooter on the legality of firearms in cities specifically. But it ended up going nowhere as he cannot debate without clamining he's up 56-3 with his backups in depicting an imaginary football game of some sort.
Anyhow, the primary point concerning gun laws is this. The purchase of a firearm should be the most difficult purchase in America. The background check should be extensive, intrusive, and exhaustive
Because statistics show that there are more gun homicides in areas with less strict gun laws.
Actually it ended when you realized you didn’t have a leg to stand on and your argument of emotion > logic, facts, and reason had lost. Also there was the fact that you could never answer this question that was asked multiple times:
You are at home with your family at 3:00AM. Someone breaks in with a shotgun intent on doing harm to you and your family. The police are at least 10 minutes away. What do you do to protect your family while you are waiting for the police to come and save you?
Actually it ended when you realized you didn’t have a leg to stand on and your argument of emotion > logic, facts, and reason had lost. Also there was the fact that you could never answer this question that was asked multiple times:
You are at home with your family at 3:00AM. Someone breaks in with a shotgun intent on doing harm to you and your family. The police are at least 10 minutes away. What do you do to protect your family while you are waiting for the police to come and save you?
@Sarasota
You haven’t offered very much to this debate other than your one liners that have no substance at all to them. And you wonder why anent criticizes your posts. These comments offer no value to a debate. If “guns kill people ,do keyboards misspell words ?”
“............Children that play in the highway have a greater chance of being run over by a car, than ones that play in their own backyard ............”
These comments are sarcasm in its finest form and offer no value to a debate.
@ steveshane
You type comments in a thread about gun politics using the lingo of a 14 year old girl. How can anyone take you seriously?
@sportsfan
When was the Bill of Rights written? Do you even know what you’re arguing? This is the 21st Century. You do realize there is the power to change a law and amend it right?
@straightshooter
I never presented any emotion in that thread at all. In fact you were the one who was bringing up these fictitious examples there were full of emotion and 4 guys confronting 1 girl. Give me break. Please tell me where I provided emotion in any of my comments.
Also, if you look at this thread, you have posters like Rick3117 who have even admitted to posting with such emotion and even “combativeness” as he calls it. So don’t give me this bullshit about myself posting with emotion I never once posted a sentence full of emotion but rather statistical facts and evidence of the NYC gun laws proving how strict they are and that many other states should adopt these similar laws.
This debate has gone no where and there is really no reason to continue because those who hold views that are contradictory to others don't know how to present information without insulting, using sarcasm or blatanly disregarding comments in a post......
but rather statistical facts and evidence of the NYC gun laws proving how strict they are and that many other states should adopt these similar laws
i did not notice any statistical facts in any of your posts or evidence, in fact this is your first mention of new york in this thread i believe
@steveshane
Never once did I say banning guns. You misread and plugged words into my mouth there. I said making it DIFFICULT to purchase a fireman. Do you understand that difference? Also I am not interested in comparing England to the USA. I am interested in researching gun homicides in states with less strict guns laws that require more than the 4473 form. If you don’t know what the 4473 form is look it up.
Also having a good shot is a very vague term. Please explain to me what a good shot is? Hitting a target from 10 feet away? 30 feet away? Or perhaps 50 feet away with a 22mm pistol? Or with a 44 magnum? Or perhaps good shot simply means simulating a shot on a computer screen that the gun licensing officers allow? Please do explain your level of proficiency that should be involved with receiving a firearms license.
Also I know you will probably disregard this last point as you assumed by my comment that your 14 year old lingo was conveniently referring to the good shot term. Not quite sure why you would think that. I was referring to the fact that when you used “bc” to abbreviate because. Of course everyone knows what that means but why not show a little more intelligence and write out the full word?
Are you that lazy that you can’t type out the full word because and capitalize the 1st word of a sentence? That’s pretty pathetic……..
@rooster
There you go:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/americas-gun-laws-how-did_b_165825.html
@straightshooter
I never presented any emotion in that thread at all. In fact you were the one who was bringing up these fictitious examples there were full of emotion and 4 guys confronting 1 girl. Give me break. Please tell me where I provided emotion in any of my comments.
Also, if you look at this thread, you have posters like Rick3117 who have even admitted to posting with such emotion and even “combativeness” as he calls it. So don’t give me this bullshit about myself posting with emotion I never once posted a sentence full of emotion but rather statistical facts and evidence of the NYC gun laws proving how strict they are and that many other states should adopt these similar laws.
This debate has gone no where and there is really no reason to continue because those who hold views that are contradictory to others don't know how to present information without insulting, using sarcasm or blatanly disregarding comments in a post......
Actually I simply said that a woman that is armed and knows how to use the weapon properly is in a better situation to defend herself from attack than a woman that is defenseless. Then you came back with elaborate scenarios like “well what if she is going up against 4 gang members with .44’s hell bent on killing her.”
You also keep mentioning “.22mm pistols.” Whatever the hell that is.
Wait, wait, wait. You randomly copied and pasted some New York statutes that had nothing to do with the discussion as a filler when you had nothing of substance to counter with and you are actually bringing that up as how you used “statistical facts.” 
find me something that is unbiased and not based on an agenda built with an ambiguous grading system
you linked me an article written by the president of the brady campaign published in the huffington post???
i could link you a hundred articles from biased sources to refute your source
please refute my earlier link that debunks the grading system put in place by the brady bill to fit their agenda
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
