Here is why "gun registration" is a freedom killer...

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
huh?

ohh sorry, i was steaming some asparagus in tinned tuna water.

when my cat eats this his piss will be EXTRA pungent.

the perfect foliar spray for my new line of dope.

im gonna undercut bucky's market and see if he stays in business through the magic of Aggregate Demand.
the funny thing is that in subsequent years i can simply stagger the harvest to fix this issue, whereas you will still be overweight, making minimum wage, and living with your mother.

in other words, i may be drunk but you are ugly and tomorrow i will wake up sober.
 

jahbrudda

Well-Known Member
the funny thing is that in subsequent years i can simply stagger the harvest to fix this issue, whereas you will still be overweight, making minimum wage, and living with your mother.

in other words, i may be drunk but you are ugly and tomorrow i will wake up sober.
I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.

Winston Churchill
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
i came up with a valid idea that i have yet to see posted anywhere..instead of embracing the spirit of invention and expanding on the idea you choose to keep your mind closed and continue the debate.

the "it's my way or the highway" attitude is why whitey rightie racist will be defeated again in 2014 and 2016 respectively..
Your idea won't work. When are you going to have time to put the thing up to your eye, wait patiently for it to scan, all the while some dude who broke into your house is beating you with a lead pipe?

What will you do with the 220 million firearms that don't have that silly device on them?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
I have a counter proposal. Accept the fact that some bad things cannot be prevented without doing other things that are even worse. For example, if you want total security from middle east terrorists, then you have to let the NSA read every email, and text and eaves drop on every phone conversation, i.e. you have to accept the patriot act and NSA wire tapping. Does this total state surveillance prevent some terrorists from killing innocent people? I am sure it does, but that security comes at a price. Many of us have lately come to realize that the price is "too damn high", just like the rent. We need to accept that total security is anathema to freedom. Freedom, in my opinion, is more valuable than total security. That's why I object to the NSA reading Cheesy's feverish email exchanges with other rape aficionados. While I am sure the wire tappers are both horrified and amused by those emails, I don't want the NSA snooping into Cheesy's strange life style.

The same argument applies to "gun violence". In point of fact, violence of every type in the US is quite low and dropping. Mass shootings are no more common today than they have been for forty years. The chance of you being shot is vanishingly small. Creating 'total security' from a danger that has been declining for decades is a solution looking for a problem. Instead of pretending that the second amendment does not mean what it says, let's just accept that it does indeed mean exactly what it says.

sound logic that also applies to voter Id.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Your idea won't work. When are you going to have time to put the thing up to your eye, wait patiently for it to scan, all the while some dude who broke into your house is beating you with a lead pipe?

What will you do with the 220 million firearms that don't have that silly device on them?

She's going to squirt them with her trusty bottle of skin lotion, that will stop them and make them see the error of their ways.

As far as the existing guns she will offer a government buyback and they can be traded for ax handles with an authentic Uncle Buck signature on them.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
i've watched minority report/i robot a bazillion times..i believe people DO have the right..make no mistake however, we must improve upon the access..just like a cell phone/ipad/iphone/laptop.
Well, I agree with access. But, access has always been a problem. Both these guys have a gun, one is just a lot better. So, blue boy has no access.
This bit is classic, and it goes on and on. Blue, finally draws, gets slapped, gun taken, slapped, handed back. Draws into a face slap again. :) :)


So, High Sky, what do mean by access vis a vis, cell phones and laptops? Do you mean, we do limit that or we don't or we should?

And while we are at it, do you not see there is a constitutional protected, and unfettered right to GUN access for ALL.

This is unlike any other OBJECT in this world. This OBJECT saves much more than it kills. This is the only OBJECT mention specifically in the Constitution, I believe.

Think about all this when you try to seem reasonable. Likening a Constitutionally protected right of access for all, to a cell phone or laptop is not being reasonable,

How is an information display and communication device even in the same paragraph as firearms? Apples and oranges are at least both round fruit.
Apple and oranges make a better comparison than this. :)

So, it is not reason., it is politics and your well tuned voting machine makes this worse and worse every year, with the un-intended consequence of FEAR and no protection. Family brutalized and no protection.

Really this entire anti-con "just be reasonable, meet in the middle is a joke" It is smugly cruel to talk us out of a Protect right, only for a fear and hand wringing agenda.

Your fear of guns is not real. You have a real fear of intruders that you are not prepared for. So, you just ignore your own safety and worry about the politics of your side. ....seems to me. :) That intruder does not need a gun. That is the sick point of this. He has the element of surprise and I only have a very short time to turn it around. And where that short time will come, is un-known to me. For that is the element of surprise.

Surprise against them is the only hope and hot lead and loud noise is very, very surprising. I hope there never is a 4th time. I hope it won't be hand to hand again.

I hope for you there never is a first time.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
bravo! standing o:clap:
What a bunch of bullshit, from both of you. Fall back on sophistry, jingo and meaningless slogans. Why? I know why. You have run out of ideas but still spreading lies as myth and sarcasm of the weak minded.

Mass murder is only rarely practiced by the gun. And that mass murder of children could have been done with a shotgun or a straight razor and certainly a tossed in IDE. Note as fact, this mental defect, Video game guy could have done that, if he had no gun.
But, one well aimed shot from a teacher, to protect her kids, would have ended it, no matter what his weapon choice. We don't even secure our Kids. Your agenda is MADNESS.

Do you really want to move this country to IDE, and cut throat, gut stab killing. only? You are doing that with this Agenda I am quite sure. Killing will happen and there are deaths much worse and sure, than a gun shot wound. No guns is impossible, now IAC. We can print them.

Guns stop mass murder. Neither of you have been assaulted in your home while you are just sitting there.

Try to gather your wits and actually imagine that happening....tonight.

Buck is not even being serious. He know taking up all the guns don't stop mass murder. We just saw a guy go a hacking in London.
All these assaults in schools have been shotguns, lately. You gonna ban smooth bore, black power and BBs?

You have fooled yourselves.

The aggressors don't need guns near as much as the defenders do.
 

beans davis

Well-Known Member
Nazi Germany implemented gun registration...then the Gestapo knew which doors to kick in when the gov banned them.

Gun control is not about guns it's about control!


1.Australia gun control cost the gov. 500 mil and crime is up 44-300%

2. 1911-Turkey established gun control.From 1915-1917, 1.5 mil armenians,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

3.1929-The USSR established gun control.From 1929-1953 about 20 mil dissidents,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

4.1938-Germany established gun control.From 1939--1945 13 mil jews and others,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

5.1935-China established gun control.From 1948-1952,20 mil political dissidents,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

6.1964-Guatemala established gun control.From 1964-1981,100,000 mayan Indians,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

7.1970-Uganda established gun control.From1971-1979 300,000 Christians,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

8.1956-Cambodia established gun control.From 1971-1977,1 mil people,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th century b/c of gun control is 56 mil.

NEXT TIME SOMEBODY TALKS TO YOU ABOUT GUN CONTROL ASK THEM "WHO DO YOU WANT TO ROUND UP AND EXTERMINATE?"

WITH GUNS,WE ARE CITIZENS.WITHOUT THEM WE ARE SUBJECTS!
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
True but facts are more powerful if they are referenced.

These folks may live to wish they had a gun and it will be themselves that denied themselves.

Yet, for most of us, we can Read the 2nd Amendment for ourselves and we can balance our risks and responsibilities and weight for the law, dead last.

Print Guns and Drones.
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
True but facts are more powerful if they are referenced.

These folks may live to wish they had a gun and it will be themselves that denied themselves.

Yet, for most of us, we can Read the 2nd Amendment for ourselves and we can balance our risks and responsibilities and weight for the law, dead last.

Print Guns and Drones.
Apparently in England if someone breaks into your house and you shoot or maim them you can be rightfully sued by the criminal. Is that stupid or what!?

BTW, did you bother to watch the video I posted in post #72? If not, you really need to. You'll be blown away by this man's articulation!
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
no one is talking about disarming, but background checks, magazine capacities, and the like are all fully constitutional.
That would be an infringement of my right. Any restriction of the 2nd is an infringement and is illegal for government ( State or Federal) to do.

[h=2]in·fringe[/h] verb \in-ˈfrinj\ : to do something that does not obey or follow (a rule, law, etc.) ( chiefly US )
: to wrongly limit or restrict (something, such as another person's rights)
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
what you want are well-equipped mass murderers with no deterrents.
I love this part.

Mass murderers have no limitation on the weapons they may employ since they could care less about the laws. When are you going to realize that laws do not stop bad things from happening?

WHEN?!?
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th century b/c of gun control is 56 mil.

But by god, if we don't do something now, some deranged lunatic might go and kill 60 million more if he gets his hands on a 100 round drum for his rifle dontchano?

Just ask Bucky.
 

beans davis

Well-Known Member
Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet

A couple of new studies reveal the gun-control hypesters’ worst nightmare…more people are buying firearms, while firearm-related homicides and suicides are steadily diminishing. What crackpots came up with these conclusions? One set of statistics was compiled by the U.S. Department of Justice. The other was reported by the Pew Research Center.

According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show “loopholes” responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.

While firearm violence accounted for about 70 percent of all homicides between 1993 and 2011, guns were used in less than 10 percent of all non-fatal violent crimes. Between 70 percent and 80 percent of those firearm homicides involved a handgun, and 90 percent of non-fatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun. Males, blacks, and persons aged 18-24 had the highest firearm homicide rates.

The March Pew study, drawn from numbers obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, also found a dramatic drop in gun crime over the past two decades. Their accounting shows a 49 percent decline in the homicide rate, and a 75 percent decline of non-fatal violent crime victimization. More than 8 in 10 gun homicide victims in 2010 were men and boys. Fifty-five percent of the homicide victims were black, far beyond their 13 percent share of the population.

Pew researchers observed that the huge amount of attention devoted to gun violence incidents in the media has caused most Americans to be unaware that gun crime is “strikingly down” from 20 years ago. In fact, gun-related homicides in the late 2000s were “equal to those not seen since the early 1960s.” Yet their survey found that 56 percent believed gun-related crime is higher, 26 percent believed it stayed about the same, and 6 percent didn’t know. Only 12 percent of those polled thought it was lower.

The Pew survey found that while women and elderly were actually less likely to become crime victims, they were more likely to believe gun crime had increased in recent years. On the other hand, men, who were more likely to become victims, were more likely know that the gun rate had dropped.

Those gun crime rates certainly aren’t diminishing for lack of supply…at least not for law-abiding legal buyers. Last December, the FBI recorded a record number of 2.78 million background checks for purchases that month, surpassing a 2.01 million mark set the month before by about 39 percent. That December 2012 figure, in turn, was up 49 percent from a previous record on that month the year before. FBI checks for all of 2012 totaled 19.6 million, an annual record, and an increase of 19 percent over 2011.

Firearms sellers can thank the gun-control legislation lobbies for much of this business windfall. Marked demand increases have been witnessed over the past five years thanks to the 2008 and 2012 elections of U.S. history’s most successful, if unintentional, gun salesman as president. The firearms market got a huge added boost after the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut activated a renewed legislative frenzy.

If that gun-purchasing fervor has abated with the defeat of several congressional regulation proposals you surely wouldn’t have known it by witnessing the overwhelmingly enormous annual NRA convention in Houston earlier this month. Attendance was estimated to be more than 70,000 people from all over the country.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.



unless background checks do not count as a "condition or qualification on the sale of firearms" (they do count as that) and unless 100 round ammo "drums" are in common use (they are not), then you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

heller even goes farther than that, too.

oopsie doopsie.
100 round drums are so fucking common, every gun store has at least 5 of them. I could buy 50 of them in under 20 minutes they are SOOOO FUCKING COMMON.

Of course someone who knows absolutely nothing about firearms would not know that though.

.50 call semiauto rifles are also VERY COMMON.

A M1A1 Abrams tank is NOT common.
 
Top