jrober38 Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 Just now, Koko78 said: What does their respective Constitutions say about the right to bear arms? Nothing. I'm just pointing out that Canadian, Ozzies, and Brits don't leave their house in the morning worried their kids school might be attacked. That kind of peace of mind probably has a lot of value to some people. 3
IDBillzFan Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 11 minutes ago, jrober38 said: USA - no gun control - Sixteen mass shootings of random civilians since 1995 (328 total deaths) Only 328 dead in 23 years? They're almost safer than bathtubs.
LA Grant Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, LABillzFan said: I'll never understand why so many people on the left are convinced the entire world is better at everything than the US, and yet your thrift store intelligence can do nothing more than stay in the US and B word about it. Canada would welcome you with open arms. As would Venezuela. And Sweden. You should go where you'll be happier. The Right's arguments are like a Russian nesting doll of bumper-sticker excuses that just get weaker & more pathetic. Now rather than discussing a policy for improving society, it must be that we "hate Amuhrica!!!" 21 minutes ago, LABillzFan said: So a teacher fires a gun in his classroom, which is empty. Why, by a leftist's logic, that's the 19th mass shooting at a school this year! When will the madness end??? Sorry, who said mass shooting? Does this not count as "school shooting"? Or are do we need to go down yet another rabbit hole defining terms? What this data suggests is that adding weapons to school is a dangerous proposition. So, then the argument changes to a new position — "Ok so, maybe don't give teachers guns. Hire trained guards." — well, Parkland had a trained guard and that didn't work so well, but maybe you'd prefer if it was Christopher Dorner standing around a school all day with an AR-15? How many dumb things like this do we need to try before we the obvious solution? 18 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Australia institutes gun control in 1996 - ZERO mass shootings of random civilians since UK institutes gun control in 1996 - One mass shooting of random civilians since (12 total deaths) Canada institutes gun control in 1995 - Two mass shootings of random civilians since (10 total deaths) USA - no gun control - Sixteen mass shootings of random civilians since 1995 (328 total deaths) Again and again and again, the logic just ricochets off of the Right's helmet-head, as they try to make it about anything other than the common sense answer. Here's the thing I also don't get about this — Why couldn't we just try national restrictions? Would it be impossible to agree to putting the proposed measures in place, say for 10 years, and then revisit? The reason, I suspect, is because the Right knows that they will work, and then they won't have the hypothetical doomsday scenarios to point to for why they could never work. Then the only argument remaining is the fundamentalist 2A one, which has more holes in it than Trump's golf calendar. 3 minutes ago, LABillzFan said: Only 328 dead in 23 years? They're almost safer than bathtubs. Are you showering with your gun? 22 minutes ago, Koko78 said: Wanna bet? (This was your response to me saying "True. But you can't buy heroin in a store two blocks from the school, k?") Yeah, I do want to bet. Go ahead & show me a store where my 18-year-old can buy legal heroin, please. If you can, I'll happily buy you an ounce, or whatever measurements heroin comes in, as a finders fee. Edited February 28, 2018 by LA Grant 1
IDBillzFan Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 1 minute ago, LA Grant said: Or are do we need to go down yet another rabbit hole defining terms? Says the rabbit. You're all over the map, Grant. All over. You write hundreds of words, and they're all designed to create some of the most ridiculous posts I've seen here in years. You should probably step away from the keyboard, refill your sippy cup, catch up on Calliou, and come back next week when you can discuss things like a grown up.
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 19 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Australia institutes gun control in 1996 - ZERO mass shootings of random civilians since UK institutes gun control in 1996 - One mass shooting of random civilians since (12 total deaths) Canada institutes gun control in 1995 - Two mass shootings of random civilians since (10 total deaths) USA - no gun control - Sixteen mass shootings of random civilians since 1995 (328 total deaths) Freedom, and the appropriate relationship between government and citizen, always has a blood cost.
Warren Zevon Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 Just now, LABillzFan said: Says the rabbit. You're all over the map, Grant. All over. You write hundreds of words, and they're all designed to create some of the most ridiculous posts I've seen here in years. You should probably step away from the keyboard, refill your sippy cup, catch up on Calliou, and come back next week when you can discuss things like a grown up. All over the map says the dweeb who claims Dicks no longer sells guns 1
jrober38 Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 6 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Again and again and again, the logic just ricochets off of the Right's helmet-head, as they try to make it about anything other than the common sense answer. Here's the thing I also don't get about this — Why couldn't we just try national restrictions? Would it be impossible to agree to putting the proposed measures in place, say for 10 years, and then revisit? The reason, I suspect, is because the Right knows that they will work, and then they won't have the hypothetical doomsday scenarios to point to for why they could never work. Then the only argument remaining is the fundamentalist 2A one, which has more holes in it than Trump's golf calendar. Agreed. It's worked pretty much everywhere else it's been implemented, and what hysterical is that the people who want to be able to buy guns, and own assault weapons will for the most part still be able to do so. Nothing will change in their life other than the small inconvenience of having to get a license or permit and pay a small fee every couple years. Life will go on as it does now, and like in those other places the number of mass shootings by psychopaths who have no business owning guns will likely be reduced dramatically. 2
LA Grant Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 1 minute ago, LABillzFan said: Says the rabbit. You're all over the map, Grant. All over. You write hundreds of words, and they're all designed to create some of the most ridiculous posts I've seen here in years. You should probably step away from the keyboard, refill your sippy cup, catch up on Calliou, and come back next week when you can discuss things like a grown up. My position is nothing if not incredibly consistent. The reason the conversation is "all over the map" is because you've thrown out every excuse you can think of to avoid discussing the problem and solution. "Come back next week" is, finally, the most plainly stated version of your actual beliefs, which boil down to "I don't want to talk about it & I don't want anything done about it."
DC Tom Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 4 minutes ago, LA Grant said: My position is nothing if not incredibly consistent. The reason the conversation is "all over the map" is because you've thrown out every excuse you can think of to avoid discussing the problem and solution. "Come back next week" is, finally, the most plainly stated version of your actual beliefs, which boil down to "I don't want to talk about it & I don't want anything done about it." You called guns a "disease." The only thing consistent about your position is it's thoroughly irrational.
Joe Miner Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 1 minute ago, LA Grant said: My position is nothing if not incredibly consistent. The reason the conversation is "all over the map" is because you've thrown out every excuse you can think of to avoid discussing the problem and solution. "Come back next week" is, finally, the most plainly stated version of your actual beliefs, which boil down to "I don't want to talk about it & I don't want anything done about it." This is from the person who had never once addressed the problem of school shootings or any actual solutions. You've continually misidentified the problem and have been consistent with wanting to get rid of one of our citizens' basic rights. The only other things you've been consistent in is your poor debate skills, and your ability to vomit uncontrollably onto your keyboard every time you post.
boyst Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 57 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Nope. I own 4 guns. Never paid a single fee since I bought any of them. I have to pay to renew my license every 5 years for the cost of $60. Oh, the horror!!!!!!! $60 is too much for me. I'd rather the price of freedom like Sandy Hook and Florida than $60 and !@#$ with my freedom
Warren Zevon Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 Just now, Boyst62 said: $60 is too much for me. I'd rather the price of freedom like Sandy Hook and Florida than $60 and !@#$ with my freedom Get bent 2 1
LA Grant Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, DC Tom said: You called guns a "disease." The only thing consistent about your position is it's thoroughly irrational. Gun violence, yes, not guns themselves. I know we can "never blame guns" themselves, perish the children before we perish the thought, my goodness. You're free to go back to the other thread to read why this counter (with the aim to prevent any research into the subject), does not work. 2 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: $60 is too much for me. I'd rather the price of freedom like Sandy Hook and Florida than $60 and !@#$ with my freedom Get bent, loser. 3 minutes ago, Joe Miner said: This is from the person who had never once addressed the problem of school shootings or any actual solutions. You've continually misidentified the problem and have been consistent with wanting to get rid of one of our citizens' basic rights. The only other things you've been consistent in is your poor debate skills, and your ability to vomit uncontrollably onto your keyboard every time you post. Oy. On & on & on & on: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html -- if you're out of free NYT articles and need me to copy/paste, LMK. "Misidentified the problem." Then what is the problem, dearest Joe? What other pattern would you like to point to besides the strikingly obvious one? "Mental health?" "Family?" Wonderful, I agree these are problems. I suppose you agree we should have better health services available to the public. Or no? Because that would mean you're paying higher taxes. So not that? Then you personally are going on a missionary trip to provide those services because it shouldn't be policy? Or no? If you have a solution — Let's hear it. Edited February 28, 2018 by LA Grant
Bob in Mich Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 Trump holding gun control open meeting now. Fox News is covering
B-Man Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said: Trump holding gun control open meeting now. Fox News is covering So............................the premier issue of the day according to the media...........................and CNN and MSNBC aren't covering it ? Why ? .
Joe Miner Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Gun violence, yes, not guns themselves. I know we can "never blame guns" themselves, perish the children before we perish the thought, my goodness. You're free to go back to the other thread to read why this counter (with the aim to prevent any research into the subject), does not work. Get bent, loser. Oy. On & on & on & on: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html -- if you're out of free NYT articles and need me to copy/paste, LMK. "Misidentified the problem." Then what is the problem, dearest Joe? What other pattern would you like to point to besides the strikingly obvious one? "Mental health?" "Family?" Wonderful, I agree these are problems. I suppose you agree we should have better health services available to the public. Or no? Because that would mean you're paying higher taxes. So not that? Then you personally are going on a missionary trip to provide those services because it shouldn't be policy? Or no? If you have a solution — Let's hear it. You don't know what the word cause means. I get it now. But again: Inability to correctly identify the problem - check Poor debate skills - check Vomiting on your keyboard - check You are the model of consistency.
LA Grant Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Agreed. It's worked pretty much everywhere else it's been implemented, and what hysterical is that the people who want to be able to buy guns, and own assault weapons will for the most part still be able to do so. Nothing will change in their life other than the small inconvenience of having to get a license or permit and pay a small fee every couple years. Life will go on as it does now, and like in those other places the number of mass shootings by psychopaths who have no business owning guns will likely be reduced dramatically. Indeed. Furthermore, most Americans overwhelmingly support this plan. Yet somehow this entirely rational course of action is shouted down with the most emotional logic-less histrionic bluster imaginable. "Shut up" is the only dish the Right can serve in return, with some "don't tread on me, not my responsibility" NRA talking points as garnish. 6 minutes ago, Joe Miner said: You don't know what the word cause means. I get it now. But again: Inability to correctly identify the problem - check Poor debate skills - check Vomiting on your keyboard - check You are the model of consistency. Oh you don't like me? Woe is me. Doesn't change the fact that gun restrictions make sense & there's no logical counterargument to it. If you're able to rub brain cells together enough to provide a response with some kind of substance, we're all ears. If not, get out of the way. Edited February 28, 2018 by LA Grant 1
Koko78 Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 36 minutes ago, LA Grant said: (This was your response to me saying "True. But you can't buy heroin in a store two blocks from the school, k?") Yeah, I do want to bet. Go ahead & show me a store where my 18-year-old can buy legal heroin, please. If you can, I'll happily buy you an ounce, or whatever measurements heroin comes in, as a finders fee. As to your parenthetical comment: No Schiff, I know what I quoted. I quoted it. As for the rest: Nice that you're trying to move the goalposts and claim "legal" heroin now. Your halfassed example was absurd, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Commsvet11 Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 So here is my question, every time a cop shoots someone unarmed, it’s the cops fault, but every time we have a mass shooting, it’s the guns fault? Which one is it?
Deranged Rhino Posted February 28, 2018 Posted February 28, 2018 10 minutes ago, B-Man said: So............................the premier issue of the day according to the media...........................and CNN and MSNBC aren't covering it ? Why ? . Democracy dies in darkness and those networks have no interest in shining a light.
Recommended Posts