Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Yeah you pretend to be interested when in reality you're staring down her shirt or hoping for a nice upskirt shot when she bends across the table 3 ffet in frontof you to pick stuff up. Don't ask me how I know 😉
Oh yeah, you're right on target.
😆
"Stay on target, stay on target....."
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You haven't asked me anything to evade, that was VVD and I doubt he's evading it.Legalising guns is a different matter than handing them out only for sport and with a licence.
-AC
Well most politicians feel that noone should have a gun unless they're legally entitled to..which means as usual, politicians and rich people and insider lawmakers can have them when noone else can. Where does it say they're any more entitled to self defense, a day at the range, or bagging a deer any more than WE are?
Hunting and sport guns ARE legal. And For The Record, I don't believe anyone should have an assault weapon or a sniper rifle. But shotguns, small cal. target rifles, and one legally licensed handgun? What's the big deal?
You were evading:
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
But as Bill Hicks said, "There's obviously no connection between having a gun and shooting someone or not having a gun and not shooting someone. You'd be a fool and a communist to make a connection."
So you're saying that people who defend gun rights are accusing others of being communsists? Prove to me that that's not the case...as far as Communists..look to people like John Kerry and Barbara Boxer, who want to hold gun manufacturers legally resp. for the actions of violent criminals who misuse their products while they open the door for floods of other baseless reckless lawsuits in other areas of product misuse.
The same people who turn around and make laws they don't have to listen to- I can have it and you can't because I'm important. Baah...
Everyone bitches about personal responsibility yet aren't willing to see it that way because regardles of our right or left leanings, the integrated and almost inherent greed that we as humas possess makes us willing to get money for almost ANYTHING by blaming others for our misdeeds instead of ourselves, where the blame truly belongs. Hot coffee at McDonald's, anyone?
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
So you're saying that people who defend gun rights are accusing others of being communsists? Prove to me that that's not the case...as far as Communists..look to people like John Kerry and Barbara Boxer, who want to hold gun manufacturers legally resp. for the actions of violent criminals who misuse their products while they open the door for floods of other baseless reckless lawsuits in other areas of product misuse.The same people who turn around and make laws they don't have to listen to- I can have it and you can't because I'm important. Baah...
Everyone bitches about personal responsibility yet aren't willing to see it that way because regardles of our right or left leanings, the integrated and almost inherent greed that we as humas possess makes us willing to get money for almost ANYTHING by blaming others for our misdeeds instead of ourselves, where the blame truly belongs. Hot coffee at McDonald's, anyone?
No one was accusing anyone of being a communist.
And, NO, gun makers should not be held accountable for the actionsof criminals....
UNLESS, they had a part in criminals getting those guns. Which, they sometimes do. There are instances where gun companies encourage black market consumption of their products.
Personal responsability? Wow, what the hell is that?
J/K...
Look, if you read any number of my posts, you'll know that I'm painfully in favor of people being made aware that they can, AND WILL, be held responsible for their personal actions. No one is advocating an abandoment of personal responsibility. Quite the opposite.
Originally posted by Wanderer259
Do you have less crime overall?
Hey, Pennsylvania has a lower crime rate than New Jersey. where guns are all but banned. People in PA (about 50,000) have right to carry licenses and the crime rate is lower than Jersey's..
Kennesaw Georgia-30 years ago their had a 90% crime rate. The State enacted right to carry laws and personal possession laws and almost 30 years later, their crime went down to about 25-30 percent.
What one factor ties these 2 case studies together? Responsible citizen practices and qualification training.
DC and LA, where guns are banned. Crime rates higher than a kite. What more can I say? Strip the law abiding citizen, you empower the criminal...
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Well most politicians feel that noone should have a gun unless they're legally entitled to..which means as usual, politicians and rich people and insider lawmakers can have them when noone else can. Where does it say they're any more entitled to self defense, a day at the range, or bagging a deer any more than WE are?
I don't personally see why anyone would want to own a gun, or get anything out of it.
My point was that regardless of what they're used for, licenced gun ownership is better than being able to go into a store and buy one quite easily isn't it? I don't agree with it, but it's safer.
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Hunting and sport guns ARE legal. And For The Record, I don't believe anyone should have an assault weapon or a sniper rifle. But shotguns, small cal. target rifles, and one legally licensed handgun? What's the big deal?
What the sh*tting hell is a gun, if not an assault weapon?
Please indulge me. Because it being designed to kill has not hit home with you yet, quite clearly.
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
So you're saying that people who defend gun rights are accusing others of being communsists? Prove to me that that's not the case...as far as Communists..look to people like John Kerry and Barbara Boxer, who want to hold gun manufacturers legally resp. for the actions of violent criminals who misuse their products while they open the door for floods of other baseless reckless lawsuits in other areas of product misuse.
Do you have an obsession with trying to tell me what I'm saying? I posted a quote that I believe to be, primarily, funny.
The fact of the matter with that quote is, it's true. We have less gun crime, dramatically less, because guns aren't legal. Conclusion to be drawn? People without guns can't shoot people. Less people with guns means that less people die from them.
I'm not interested in who wants what. That was the only point I made.
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
The same people who turn around and make laws they don't have to listen to- I can have it and you can't because I'm important. Baah...Everyone bitches about personal responsibility yet aren't willing to see it that way because regardles of our right or left leanings, the integrated and almost inherent greed that we as humas possess makes us willing to get money for almost ANYTHING by blaming others for our misdeeds instead of ourselves, where the blame truly belongs. Hot coffee at McDonald's, anyone?
Feel free to tell me how any of this was relevant to what I said.
-AC
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
DC and LA, where guns are banned. Crime rates higher than a kite. What more can I say? Strip the law abiding citizen, you empower the criminal...
It's high in those places because it always has been...
Your numbers are influenced by the fact that the law isn't restrictive on a national level.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
No one was accusing anyone of being a communist.And, NO, gun makers should not be held accountable for the actionsof criminals....
UNLESS, they had a part in criminals getting those guns. Which, they sometimes do. There are instances where gun companies encourage black market consumption of their products.
Personal responsability? Wow, what the hell is that?
J/K...
Look, if you read any number of my posts, you'll know that I'm painfully in favor of people being made aware that they can, AND WILL, be held responsible for their personal actions. No one is advocating an abandoment of personal responsibility. Quite the opposite.
I was addressing AC when he said that bit about Bill Hicks. Not YOU.
He said:
But as Bill Hicks said, "There's obviously no connection between having a gun and shooting someone or not having a gun and not shooting someone. You'd be a fool and a communist to make a connection."
Sorry if you got the wrong idea, thank AC and his careful redirections for that one. And I agree with all of what you said above. Assisted illegal sales or knowingly selling to convicted felons is a bad idea, and should be punished.
Want more proof of stupidity?
FYI-Mayor Bloomberg of New York is now pissing all over the NRA because they found out he was doing nothing about the state issuing hunting licenses to convicted felons. He chose to deflect from his inability as a lawmaker, by recently blaming the NRA for the shooting of a police officer by a suspect who was let go 10 days before the shooting in light of the fact he was indicted in another shooting.
Right. And he makes a statement to the effect that it's the NRA versus thelives of our police and citizens. Coming from a man who tried to fine over 100 people for sitting on milk crates in Central Park, I'll take his statements with 2 grains of salt and not one.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That, and the fact that we're speaking about gun crime, to my knowledge.No legal guns means less gun crime. It doesn't take a chemistry set to work out.
-AC
And it dosen't take " a chemistry set" to realize that law abiding citizens are not part of the criminal element. But Michael Moore says so and he's always right...so you say we make it fair by banning everyone's guns while politicians and rich elites take what we once had and reserve it for themselves under the guise of personal study?
I say this because years ago, after assault weapons and certain rifles and handguns were banned, the politicians were seen shooting them at the ranges with the police on a regular basis, because the government found a way to allow them to keep one of their choiceat the range, and handgun in their houses for "study" reasons. Bullshit.
No guns means none for anyone, not taking from the people and reserving them for others on the basis of personal study reasons.
Again, politicians making laws they don't have to listen to.
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
And it dosen't take " a chemistry set" to realize that law abiding citizens are not part of the criminal element. But Michael Moore says so and he's always right...so you say we make it fair by banning everyone's guns while politicians and rich elites take what we once had and reserve it for themselves under the guise of personal study?I say this because years ago, after assault weapons and certain rifles and handguns were banned, the politicians were seen shooting them at the ranges with the police on a regular basis, because the government found a way to allow them to keep one of their choiceat the range, and handgun in their houses for "study" reasons. Bullshit.
No guns means none for anyone, not taking from the people and reserving them for others on the basis of personal study reasons.
Again, politicians making laws they don't have to listen to.
You might be suprised to discover that I think Michael Moore is a turd. A big steamy turd.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
That doesn't make me any less aware of what Bill Hicks was saying...
He says that only fools and Communists speak out against guns. And AC quoted him, not YOU. That's wehat I meant.
And you mentioned noone was accusing anyone of being a Communist, and I was recognizing that YOU weren't but AC spelled it out plain and simple that pro-gunners accuse anti-gunners of being Communist. And since HE said it thru his quoting of Bill Hicks, I wanted to let you know I knew it.
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
And it dosen't take " a chemistry set" to realize that law abiding citizens are not part of the criminal element. But Michael Moore says so and he's always right...so you say we make it fair by banning everyone's guns while politicians and rich elites take what we once had and reserve it for themselves under the guise of personal study?
No, I'm not saying that am I? Why do you continually insist on doing that? It's genuinely confusing.
I'm saying that if I had my way, nobody besides the armed forces would be allowed guns. No exception.
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
I say this because years ago, after assault weapons and certain rifles and handguns were banned, the politicians were seen shooting them at the ranges with the police on a regular basis, because the government found a way to allow them to keep one of their choiceat the range, and handgun in their houses for "study" reasons. Bullshit.
Yes, it is bullshit. What's your point?
Originally posted by Dagons Blade
No guns means none for anyone, not taking from the people and reserving them for others on the basis of personal study reasons.
Again, politicians making laws they don't have to listen to.
Right. If you took down the shields for a second you'd see this was my original point.
-AC