truth on hold Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Nobody applauds the gun violence in Chicago. Don't be that fool. Besides, we don't have time to applaud the gun violence in Chicago because we're too busy being stunned by how little libs, progs and Dems care about blacks murdering blacks. I'm sure you'd feel luckier if just one of those murders in Chicago came from the gun of a white hispanic again, ammiright? Kidding right ? The only ones trying to remove "blacks" from the figures are goof balls like darin who want to extract gang violence from the gun homicide statistics. But keep up your nonsense narratives about "liberals", and keep silent on other gun humpers like darin.
IDBillzFan Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Kidding right ? The only ones trying to remove "blacks" from the figures are goof balls like darin who want to extract gang violence from the gun homicide statistics. But keep up your nonsense narratives about "liberals", and keep silent on other gun humpers like darin. So I'm guessing your answer here is to take all guns from everyone except government officials? Am I getting this right? Of do you have some other solution no one has considered yet?
Nanker Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 (edited) So I'm guessing your answer here is to take all guns from everyone except government officials? Am I getting this right? Of do you have some other solution no one has considered yet? I've got one. According to his swell chart, there are fewer than 100 guns per 100 Americans, yet there are about 10 deaths (about half are suicides) per 100k Americans. I say the government should REQUIRE everyone to have a gun - call it the Affordable GunCarrying Act and make people pay a fine to the IRS if they can't prove they own a gun. Then, make it illegal to use a gun to commit suicide. That'll cut the rate in half so we'd be right in step with those fine folks in Canada, Finland, and drumroll............. Switzerland - the land of the iconic peace-loving, fondue-slurping, watch-making, yodel-yodeling, secure-bank account-secret-keeping Swiss. We'd be another step or two closer to LeftyNirvana. Speaking of Nirvana, didn't that guy off himself with a gun? Hmmm... Edited July 9, 2014 by Nanker
Joe Miner Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 I've got one. According to his swell chart, there are fewer than 100 guns per 100 Americans, yet there are about 10 deaths (about half are suicides) per 100k Americans. I say the government should REQUIRE everyone to have a gun - call it the Affordable GunCarrying Act and make people pay a fine to the IRS if they can't prove they own a gun. Then, make it illegal to use a gun to commit suicide. That'll cut the rate in half so we'd be right in step with those fine folks in Canada, Finland, and drumroll............. Switzerland - the land of the iconic peace-loving, fondue-slurping, watch-making, yodel-yodeling, secure-bank account-secret-keeping Swiss. We'd be another step or two closer to LeftyNirvana. Speaking of Nirvana, didn't that guy off himself with a gun? Hmmm... So the US has 3 times the number of guns per 100 people than Canada, but only twice as many gun deaths? Looks like those pesky Canadians don't have a good grasp on gun safety. Probably tough handling a gun when your hands are all sticky with syrup.
Alaska Darin Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Kidding right ? The only ones trying to remove "blacks" from the figures are goof balls like darin who want to extract gang violence from the gun homicide statistics. But keep up your nonsense narratives about "liberals", and keep silent on other gun humpers like darin. You mean because gangs only use legally gotten guns and if guns were made completely illegal then gangs wouldn't ever be able to get their hands on them? It won't resemble drug war at all, amiright? "Gun humper"?
B-Man Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 Rolling Stone has compiled a definitive record of “The 5 Most Dangerous Guns in America.” They are, and I’m not kidding here: Pistols Revolvers Rifles Shotguns Derringers So . . . pretty much every single gun legally available in America then. There are no words. .
IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 There are no words. On the upside, it's good to finally see the top 5 list no longer includes "marshmallow" and "pop tart," as both of those gun types have been getting a lot of press at the elementary school level lately.
Chef Jim Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 So . . . pretty much every single gun legally available in America then. I think that's their point.
B-Man Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 I think that's their point. Then they don't need a "top 5" listing . it's Juvenile writing, non-existent editing.
DC Tom Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 Rolling Stone has compiled a definitive record of “The 5 Most Dangerous Guns in America.” They are, and I’m not kidding here: Pistols Revolvers Rifles Shotguns Derringers So . . . pretty much every single gun legally available in America then. There are no words. Derringers? Derringers? How many people have been killed by derringers in the past 20 years? Maybe three? More people have probably choked on derringers since 1970 than been shot by one. You don't fire a derringer, you display it in a UV-resistant glass case on a turntable with soft lighting. They're all friggin' antiques, the last one was made in 1935. Nice to see illegal "assault weapons" aren't on the list. Guess we should legalize them, then...y'know, since they're apparently safer than derringers.
Oxrock Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Derringers? Derringers? How many people have been killed by derringers in the past 20 years? Maybe three? More people have probably choked on derringers since 1970 than been sh0ot by one. You don't fire a derringer, you display it in a UV-resistant glass case on a turntable with soft lighting. They're all friggin' antiques, the last one was made in 1935. Nice to see illegal "assault weapons" aren't on the list. Guess we should legalize them, then...y'know, since they're apparently safer than derringers. Ok. You are usually on top of things. I'll help you out: 1. Pistols - hand gun 2. Revolvers - hand gun 3. Rifles - well, rifle 4. Shotguns - meh, shotgun 5. Derringer - hand gun So, to recap: 1. Handguns 2. Handguns 3. Rifles 4. Shotguns 5. Handguns or for mockery go: http://twitchy.com/2014/07/15/rolling-stone-inspires-mockery-with-list-of-most-dangerous-guns/
B-Man Posted July 27, 2014 Posted July 27, 2014 Attorney Alan Gura writes on his blog Saturday: Justice never sleeps…. not even on a Saturday afternoon, when this opinion was just handed down. In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Federal judge rules DC ban on gun carry rights unconstitutional A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Saturday overturned the city’s total ban on residents being allowing to carry firearms outside their home in a landmark decision for gun-rights activists. Judge Frederick Scullin Jr. wrote in his ruling in Palmer v. District of Columbia that the right to bear arms extends outside the home, therefore gun-control laws in the nation’s capital are “unconstitutional.” “We won,” Alan Gura, the lead attorney for the Second Amendment Foundation, told Fox News in a phone interview. “I’m very pleased with the decision that the city can’t forbid the exercise of a fundamental constitutional right." Gura said he expects the District to appeal this decision but added, “We’ll be happy to keep the fight going.” The decision leaves no gray area in gun-carrying rights. Judge Sculin extensively referenced the Supreme Court decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010) to concluding “there is no longer any basis on which this court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.” The court ordered the city to now allow residents from the District and other states to carry weapon within its boundaries. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/26/emily-miller-federal-judge-rules-dc-ban-on-gun-carry-rights-unconstitutional/
DC Tom Posted July 27, 2014 Posted July 27, 2014 http://www.foxnews.c...constitutional/ Means nothing until the Supremes get the case.
OCinBuffalo Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 (edited) Despite the headlines, gun violence in Chicago has been declining for years. Most crime experts say sudden spikes in shootings are not indicative of any single problem, but that violence is best understood when examined over a wider time frame. Total homicides in Chicago are actually down six percent from last year: 185 homicides to date, compared with 196 in 2013. http://www.csmonitor...ns-are-familiar Hmm. So I guess I'm the only one who sees the irony in talking about "examining things over a wider time frame", and then, immediately following that sentence with comparing data from one year to the next? Unmitigated moron. Do these people ever think anything through before they say it? Are any of these people capable of proper statistical analysis...unsupervised? The simple fact is: IF liberals were right about any of this, then, the strictest gun laws in the country should have cut gun deaths(over a wide-r? time frame ) year in and year out. If we "widen the time frame" to include the all the years these gun laws have been in place? We should easily be expecting 20 gun homicides per year at most, not 196. Year after year, if working as advertised, these Chicago gun laws should be be "getting the guns off the street" by preventing the new sale of guns, and reducing their # by attrition, if nothing else. But, that would require liberal gun laws to actually be effective. Clearly, by "widening the time frame", they are not. The gun laws are in place because: they are supposed to be preventing 196, or 185, gun deaths in Chicago. They are the "solution" to the "gun problem". Some "solution". Oh I already know the liberal(since we aren't saying progressive anymore) excuse: "but..but..but...the criminals are bringing in guns from other states!" Yes, shitheel. And what about that was ever going to change, by you passing tougher gun laws in Chicago? Hey Joe? When do we end this farce, and begin a real, actual solution to the people problem in Chicago? Edited July 28, 2014 by OCinBuffalo
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 Hey Joe? When do we end this farce, and begin a real, actual solution to the people problem in Chicago? He thinks you're talking about the Jews.
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 Beretta moving from Maryland to Tennessee: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/beretta-moving-production-out-of-md-joins-gun-makers-heading-to-friendlier-states/2014/07/27/064774ac-141a-11e4-8936-26932bcfd6ed_story.html
Koko78 Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 He thinks you're talking about the Jews. If Bush didn't bring all the Jews to Chicago, there would be no violence in that city.
Nanker Posted July 29, 2014 Posted July 29, 2014 If Bush didn't bring all the Jews to Chicago, there would be no violence in that city. The only "good Jew" is one without a gun, no doubt.
/dev/null Posted July 29, 2014 Posted July 29, 2014 Beretta moving from Maryland to Tennessee: http://www.washingto...d6ed_story.html Interesting. Back when Maryland was debating their new gun laws, Beretta made some noise that they would stop making their product in a state where it is illegal to own the product made in the state and move to a friendlier state. Then they turned silent. This was all going on while the US Senate was debating their own gun bill. Rumor was that the Obama Administration was leaning on Beretta thru the DoD, whose standard issue sidearm is the Beretta M9.
Chef Jim Posted July 29, 2014 Posted July 29, 2014 (edited) Beretta moving from Maryland to Tennessee: http://www.washingto...d6ed_story.html I was wondering why we'd care about where Robert Blake was moving even though mentioning him in a gun control thread is apropo. Edited July 29, 2014 by Chef Jim
Recommended Posts