Are you for or against gun control?

bizarrojohnson

bizarrojohnson

Well-Known Member
According to them, the people it happened to it was accidental. Blah blah you spelled a word wrong I spell checked your post mehhh.....pompous ass.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
My question is why King. We choose to not have ANY King or Kings..In your world there has to be kings ??? Then if so I want a fucking crown,,,and none of that burger king bullshit
Click to expand...
You are aware of Tiffany & Co., NY? Brother King, I only write King because I'm sick of writing Sovereign. Synonym.

We have no King over us, ergo sum we are all individual Kings protected by the 9th A. and the Castle Doctrine (not available in all 50 States, must be 18 years or older, not incarcerated and a citizen of the USA)

Oh, Tiffany? You can have any Crown you want.Set any rules you want that don't tread on me.

What are they teaching these days?

You can't have serfs and lately slaves but you can have kooks around you at all times. :) Those kooks are other Kings of their little kooky worlds.

Man, I am so sorry you don't know how actually free WE are.

We are the Kings of small world freedom. So soon we forget.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
You are aware of Tiffany & Co., NY? Brother King, I only write King because I'm sick of writing Sovereign. Synonym.

We have no King over us, ergo sum we are all individual Kings protected by the 9th A. and the Castle Doctrine (not available in all 50 States, must be 18 years or older, not incarcerated and a citizen of the USA)

Oh, Tiffany? You can have any Crown you want.Set any rules you want that don't tread on me.

What are they teaching these days?

You can't have serfs and lately slaves but you can have kooks around you at all times. :) Those kooks are other Kings of their little kooky worlds.

Man, I am so sorry you don't know how actually free WE are.

We are the Kings of small world freedom. So soon we forget.
Click to expand...
Seems like you smoking some good shit. Puff puff pass my man
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
MidwesternGro said:
Having laws that:

1)Make it illegal for convicted murderers or rapists buy guns.
2)Make it illegal for mentally retarded people to buy guns.
3)Make it illegal for people convicted of domestic violence to buy guns.
4)Make it illegal for a man who runs into a gun store screaming about how he is going to shoot his girlfriend in the face to buy guns.

Is gun control. If you agree with any of the above, you support gun control!

So are you for gun control or are you against it?
Click to expand...
People who use illegal drugs, ya know, pot, are also banned from legally owning guns. Most of the people who comment at RIU are not allowed to own guns. After reading your post, that does not sound like too bad an idea.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
OMG dude did you really just give me cities that were not even part of the American Frontier at the time of your dates. Hell San Diego was first owned by Spain at your dates and and then was owned by Mexico. We didn't receive it until after the Mexican-American war 1846-48( (hint again Wild west era )

San Francisco again Spain with your dates.Now again when did the wild west make it to San Francisco hint gold-rush and the 49ers


Claudius Smith was during the Revolutionary War. Never even came west.You can't be this dumb. Not even a good troll
Click to expand...
You know one of the reasons there was no law? There were no towns.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Sorry missed your stupid answer, but Albuquerque was founded in 1706 by Spain ..We occupied it starting in 1846 ( WOW again a date of the Wild west era I keep stating )

I think you guys better study up on your American history or we will have to start voiding citizenship.
Click to expand...
Hey London, guess what? When they made New Mexico a state? Everyone living there became US Citizens.

I know its amazing and all, but its totally true. We didn't make states, remove all the people there, and then ship in our own people from the original 13 you know??? Just like San Francisco was actually populated by white people since its inception. Oh sure, Mexico had it for a few years, but they didn't move all the white people out and move Mexicans in you understand ? So it really makes little sense to argue that it can't be the wild west because it didn't belong to the USA, the Wild West is not an official state or anything, check the map, you won't find it. The wild west was everything west of the Mississippi and was named WILD because there was no law enforcement.

and in 100 years of such a western place that had no law enforcement, there were fewer murders than in the last 5 years in Chicago.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
Hey London, guess what? When they made New Mexico a state? Everyone living there became US Citizens.

I know its amazing and all, but its totally true. We didn't make states, remove all the people there, and then ship in our own people from the original 13 you know??? Just like San Francisco was actually populated by white people since its inception. Oh sure, Mexico had it for a few years, but they didn't move all the white people out and move Mexicans in you understand ? So it really makes little sense to argue that it can't be the wild west because it didn't belong to the USA, the Wild West is not an official state or anything, check the map, you won't find it. The wild west was everything west of the Mississippi and was named WILD because there was no law enforcement.

and in 100 years of such a western place that had no law enforcement, there were fewer murders than in the last 5 years in Chicago.
Click to expand...
oh well..I tried to lead you down the path of knowledge, but now I have to take the wife out to listen to some jazz and dinner. I will try again with you later
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
oh well..I tried to lead you down the path of knowledge, but now I have to take the wife out to listen to some jazz and dinner. I will try again with you later
Click to expand...
The path of knowledge is riddled with many other paths less traveled, all of which end up in the same place.
 
beardo

beardo

Well-Known Member
When they convince the farmers to turn in their guns, those who surrender them soon find themselves working the fields for those who did not.
 
MidwesternGro

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
No, my argument is that creating all sorts of new gun control laws will do NOTHING to stem the tide of murders or violent assaults. In fact it will EXACERBATE them by taking away ones ability to defend oneself from weapon wielding criminals who don't give a shit what the law says.

The problem will get WORSE, not better.
Click to expand...
How many people were killed by guns in England last year?
 
MidwesternGro

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
[h=1]58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US[/h]"
umber of Murders, United States, 2010: 12,996
Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2010: 8,775

Number of Murders, Britain, 2011*: 638
(Since Britain's population is 1/5 that of US, this is equivalent to 3,095 US murders)

Number of Murders by firearms, Britain, 2011*: 58
(equivalent to 290 US murders)

Number of Murders by crossbow in Britain, 2011*: 2
(equivalent to 10 US murders).
​
For more on murder by firearms in Britain, see the BBC.
The international comparisons show conclusively that fewer gun owners per capita produce not only fewer murders by firearm, but fewer murders per capita overall. In the case of Britain, firearms murders are 30 times fewer than in the US per capita.
Do hunters really need semi-automatic AR-15 assault weapons? Is that how they roll in deer season? The US public doesn’t think so."

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/335-156/12554-58-murders-a-year-by-firearms-in-britain-8775-in-us

Stop lying! Gun control does work! England is proof!
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Well you are wrong and thinking like a Subject. The 9th A says you can't say what we need and Supreme Court DC vs Heller says it is not about hunting but about battle rifles.....but what do you really know....this?

In the UK, there are 2,034 offenses per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-place Austria at 1,677. The U.S. has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada has 935, Australia has 92, and South Africa has 1,609.
Yes — the UK has a larger problem with violent crime than South Africa.


Despite increased home invasion crime, Tony Blair ruled out legislation to aide the homeowner.
Because burglars know they have little to worry about from their victims, burglaries are rising — many resulting in lengthened ordeals for the victims including threats of killing and torture:

-------------

it is already proven. Less guns, more crime.
--------------------
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html

Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.
Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.

----------------
With a Parliament and no Constitution the British aren't even told much. They don't know the names
of those that are being tried. The Press and Courts are hush-hush. We rebelled.

England has over twice the assault and rape. That is what guns are for.

Not hunting tools, battle capable killing tools says SCOTUS, for the CONSTANT breakdown in civil order.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime
 
MidwesternGro

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
Well you are wrong and thinking like a Subject. The 9th A says you can't say what we need and Supreme Court DC vs Heller says it is not about hunting but about battle rifles.....but what do you really know....this?

In the UK, there are 2,034 offenses per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-place Austria at 1,677. The U.S. has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada has 935, Australia has 92, and South Africa has 1,609.
Yes — the UK has a larger problem with violent crime than South Africa.


Despite increased home invasion crime, Tony Blair ruled out legislation to aide the homeowner.
Because burglars know they have little to worry about from their victims, burglaries are rising — many resulting in lengthened ordeals for the victims including threats of killing and torture:

-------------

it is already proven. Less guns, more crime.
--------------------
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html

Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.
Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.

----------------
With a Parliament and no Constitution the British aren't even told much. They don't know the names
of those that are being tried. The Press and Courts are hush-hush. We rebelled.

England has over twice the assault and rape. That is what guns are for.

Not hunting tools, battle capable killing tools says SCOTUS, for the CONSTANT breakdown in civil order.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime
Click to expand...
I said England, not the UK. There is a difference, yes? Or did you fail geography? Who has more gun deaths, England or the U.S.? No sophistry this time.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Hell even 12 years ago they realized that ENGLAND has a major crime problem.

According to the figures released yesterday, 3.6 per cent of the population of England and Wales were victims of violent crime in 1999 - second only to Australia, where the figure was 4.1 per cent.

Scotland had a slightly lower rate of violence, at 3.4 per cent.
In the U.S., only 2 per cent of the population suffered an assault or robbery.
​
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top