Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » I want to ask you liberals a question about the gun thing.

I want to ask you liberals a question about the gun thing.

4 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

William wrote:
It must be awful living in constant fear of the government, driving on their roads and drinking their water, enjoying their power grid...



I thought I owned the power grid (I have Southern Company stock). In fact I was planning to raise the electric rate until I read this. Shit.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:
And don't you think it's a little peculiar that the mainstream media is not reporting this. Because I did a google search and only the obscure websites and blogs are talking about it, not the news media.

Bob wrote:
All I know is if that bitch got her way with that and an attempt was actually made to disarm us all, she'd very likely be the first one to get a bullet in her brain pan. And if I could get past her bodyguards it would be my bullet.

Bob wrote:I should have been more skeptical.

Are you taking your meds as prescribed?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Actually, Sal, this thread was designed to be a little exercise in posting.
Let this be a lesson to you all. After you type a post, always reflect on what you've written before you hit the send button.

boards of FL

boards of FL

I reflected on this post before submitting it.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
William wrote:



It must be awful living in constant fear of the government, driving on their roads and drinking their water, enjoying their power grid, and yes....chatting to us on their internet, pining for being free and independent of government, not expecting them to solve any of our problems.

How's that working for ya...?

There's no situation too complicated that it cannot be over simplified by zealots and true believers.


Above, two quotes from William I thought were worth adding to...
Yes, I agree, people forget about all the things we have because the govment put tax money to work to benefit everyone. Protests often begin in parks.

Secondly, even in the wildest fantasies of the Cold Dead Hand crowd, how in the blue blazes would any arm of the government go about actually collecting all 270,000,000 firearms? This group of gun lovers would have us believe there is some giant gun magnet that would automatically suck up every last weapon leaving the population to assault each other with knives overnight. Are you telling me that all the survivalists, hunters, collectors couldn't figure out ways to hide and/or accidentally 'misplace' their weapons? How many 100's of years would all this imagined collecting take?

I point out the difficulty in doing this in the real world in full view of the fact that NO ONE is talking about confiscating guns anyway.

What about the rights of people not to get mowed down by some clown with an assault weapon that was intended only for fighting a war? What's the problem with having a universal background check? 20 little children blown to bits have no rights to a safe education but the John Waynes of the country MUST HAVE THEIR WEAPONS?! To me this is just totally unacceptable, stupid.

.....................................


It's always about the slippery slope, hand polished by gun freak activists using the wax from 20 million clogged ears.

And if anybody is unwilling to accept the fact that at least a part of their insipid fear is indexed to that black interloper sleeping in the White House, well...they are being intellectually dishonest. Overlapping agendas, as it were. Not all gun freaks are racist, but almost all racists are gun freaks.

Cue the gun freaks who will now line up to accuse me of playing the race card.

Trolls sit here and deny that most racism and bigotry is from the right wingnut perspective, then accuse liberals of being the real racists.....there simply isn't an honest bone in their body.

Some want independence and hate the government, as long as there isn't a hurricane or tornado tearing up their house of cards.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

boards of FL wrote:I reflected on this post before submitting it.
Then my work is done here.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

William wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
William wrote:



It must be awful living in constant fear of the government, driving on their roads and drinking their water, enjoying their power grid, and yes....chatting to us on their internet, pining for being free and independent of government, not expecting them to solve any of our problems.

How's that working for ya...?

There's no situation too complicated that it cannot be over simplified by zealots and true believers.


Above, two quotes from William I thought were worth adding to...
Yes, I agree, people forget about all the things we have because the govment put tax money to work to benefit everyone. Protests often begin in parks.

Secondly, even in the wildest fantasies of the Cold Dead Hand crowd, how in the blue blazes would any arm of the government go about actually collecting all 270,000,000 firearms? This group of gun lovers would have us believe there is some giant gun magnet that would automatically suck up every last weapon leaving the population to assault each other with knives overnight. Are you telling me that all the survivalists, hunters, collectors couldn't figure out ways to hide and/or accidentally 'misplace' their weapons? How many 100's of years would all this imagined collecting take?

I point out the difficulty in doing this in the real world in full view of the fact that NO ONE is talking about confiscating guns anyway.

What about the rights of people not to get mowed down by some clown with an assault weapon that was intended only for fighting a war? What's the problem with having a universal background check? 20 little children blown to bits have no rights to a safe education but the John Waynes of the country MUST HAVE THEIR WEAPONS?! To me this is just totally unacceptable, stupid.

.....................................


It's always about the slippery slope, hand polished by gun freak activists using the wax from 20 million clogged ears.

And if anybody is unwilling to accept the fact that at least a part of their insipid fear is indexed to that black interloper sleeping in the White House, well...they are being intellectually dishonest. Overlapping agendas, as it were. Not all gun freaks are racist, but almost all racists are gun freaks.

Cue the gun freaks who will now line up to accuse me of playing the race card.

Trolls sit here and deny that most racism and bigotry is from the right wingnut perspective, then accuse liberals of being the real racists.....there simply isn't an honest bone in their body.

Some want independence and hate the government, as long as there isn't a hurricane or tornado tearing up their house of cards.


I realize the slippery slope concept that runs as the background music to all anti-gun safety ads. We know that's there but I don't see much push back against that reasoning, at least none that sticks.

The NRA is sponsored by gun manufacturers, that's plain so again it comes down to $$$ and not child safety. It makes me sick that we might not get even so much as a background check out of this. How is it that such an overwhelming public support exists for at least a background check and still the pols can't manage to pass something meaningful.

So we are sacrificing the safety of our children for this wild west attitude? Is this really "pro-life"? Protect the unborn but after that the little tikes are on their own. USA, USA, USA!!!

Guest


Guest

William wrote:
Bob wrote:What do you think about a prominent U.S. Senator saying that if she had her way she would take away ALL the guns from Americans?

And don't you think it's a little peculiar that the mainstream media is not reporting this. Because I did a google search and only the obscure websites and blogs are talking about it, not the news media.

And no it's not made up or a misquote or out of context because you can watch and listen to her say it.

http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=60E60EB8874E0282DC22BBDDA341BFEB

.........................................

The context was about assault weapons. Are you trying to do the bidding of that wing nut site, doing their job for them spinning it to mean she was talking about confiscating all guns, en toto.

Selective editing w/ an abrupt ending when I'm pretty sure she wasn't finished making her point.

When you've got a stick in your hand you'll stir any pot, won't you...?


Assault weapon is a term used to instill fear and hype. A .223 is far less powerful than any deer rifle that you can buy on the open market. Why don't we ban cars because more people die from them than guns?

Guest


Guest

Assault weapon is a term used to instill fear and hype. A .223 is far less powerful than any deer rifle that you can buy on the open market. Why don't we ban cars because more people die from them than guns?


............................................

Why do you constantly try to change the focus of any thread that makes your side look childish...? Is that why you respond with a childish question...?

We can't ban cars because the gun freaks would have to hitchhike around just to buy guns. Duh...







Guest


Guest

William wrote:Assault weapon is a term used to instill fear and hype. A .223 is far less powerful than any deer rifle that you can buy on the open market. Why don't we ban cars because more people die from them than guns?


............................................

Why do you constantly try to change the focus of any thread that makes your side look childish...? Is that why you respond with a childish question...?

We can't ban cars because the gun freaks would have to hitchhike around just to buy guns. Duh...




Again, when someone disagrees, you use the tact of insults to try and build yourself over what was presented when you cannot fathom a reasonable response.

If cars are statistically more dangerous than guns, ban them.

BTW, the average AR or AK weighs no more than 7 or so pounds. I can tote a sack load of them with the money to buy if provided.

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
William wrote:Assault weapon is a term used to instill fear and hype. A .223 is far less powerful than any deer rifle that you can buy on the open market. Why don't we ban cars because more people die from them than guns?


............................................

Why do you constantly try to change the focus of any thread that makes your side look childish...? Is that why you respond with a childish question...?

We can't ban cars because the gun freaks would have to hitchhike around just to buy guns. Duh...




Again, when someone disagrees, you use the tact of insults to try and build yourself over what was presented when you cannot fathom a reasonable response.

If cars are statistically more dangerous than guns, ban them.

BTW, the average AR or AK weighs no more than 7 or so pounds. I can tote a sack load of them with the money to buy if provided.

........................................

You're just a stalking troll who will NEVER change. Somehow you decided this is your forum to police, and I'm your designated target, every fucking day, over and over and over. Get off my ass troll....leave me the fuck alone.

Ignore me or get ready to start another 15 threads crying over how I'm the worst thing to happen TO your pathetic life since desegregation.

BTW idiot. Your ignorant analogy was so lame it was limping when you posted it. A vehicle is a necessity so we can transport the victims of gun violence to the ER. Guns ARE NOT a necessity in American everyday life.

If you consider the sheer numbers of vehicles in motion every day, vs. the number of times a gun is used every day, the stats will always show the higher incidents involving vehicles. The higher the lateral exposure, the higher the rate of negative incidents.

And you are supposedly a teacher....?

We're fucked.

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
William wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
William wrote:



It must be awful living in constant fear of the government, driving on their roads and drinking their water, enjoying their power grid, and yes....chatting to us on their internet, pining for being free and independent of government, not expecting them to solve any of our problems.

How's that working for ya...?

There's no situation too complicated that it cannot be over simplified by zealots and true believers.


Above, two quotes from William I thought were worth adding to...
Yes, I agree, people forget about all the things we have because the govment put tax money to work to benefit everyone. Protests often begin in parks.

Secondly, even in the wildest fantasies of the Cold Dead Hand crowd, how in the blue blazes would any arm of the government go about actually collecting all 270,000,000 firearms? This group of gun lovers would have us believe there is some giant gun magnet that would automatically suck up every last weapon leaving the population to assault each other with knives overnight. Are you telling me that all the survivalists, hunters, collectors couldn't figure out ways to hide and/or accidentally 'misplace' their weapons? How many 100's of years would all this imagined collecting take?

I point out the difficulty in doing this in the real world in full view of the fact that NO ONE is talking about confiscating guns anyway.

What about the rights of people not to get mowed down by some clown with an assault weapon that was intended only for fighting a war? What's the problem with having a universal background check? 20 little children blown to bits have no rights to a safe education but the John Waynes of the country MUST HAVE THEIR WEAPONS?! To me this is just totally unacceptable, stupid.

.....................................


It's always about the slippery slope, hand polished by gun freak activists using the wax from 20 million clogged ears.

And if anybody is unwilling to accept the fact that at least a part of their insipid fear is indexed to that black interloper sleeping in the White House, well...they are being intellectually dishonest. Overlapping agendas, as it were. Not all gun freaks are racist, but almost all racists are gun freaks.

Cue the gun freaks who will now line up to accuse me of playing the race card.

Trolls sit here and deny that most racism and bigotry is from the right wingnut perspective, then accuse liberals of being the real racists.....there simply isn't an honest bone in their body.

Some want independence and hate the government, as long as there isn't a hurricane or tornado tearing up their house of cards.


I realize the slippery slope concept that runs as the background music to all anti-gun safety ads. We know that's there but I don't see much push back against that reasoning, at least none that sticks.

The NRA is sponsored by gun manufacturers, that's plain so again it comes down to $$$ and not child safety. It makes me sick that we might not get even so much as a background check out of this. How is it that such an overwhelming public support exists for at least a background check and still the pols can't manage to pass something meaningful.

So we are sacrificing the safety of our children for this wild west attitude? Is this really "pro-life"? Protect the unborn but after that the little tikes are on their own. USA, USA, USA!!!

Tell me the part about how a background check or other gun control measures will work on crazies and criminals.

I love good fiction.

If you really want a solution you should get off these fractional measures and start door to door confiscations... right?

Guest


Guest

You're right again. Locks only keep out the honest. Same as walls.

I'm guessing you lock your doors.

Why bother to introduce any sort of stop gap measure into the equation when we both know that criminals ignore locks, and security systems, right...?

Guest


Guest

William wrote:You're right again. Locks only keep out the honest. Same as walls.

I'm guessing you lock your doors.

Why bother to introduce any sort of stop gap measure into the equation when we both know that criminals ignore locks, and security systems, right...?


yep, because we must register all gun owners so we know where they are, just like we know where all those criminals are. ask the gangs that don't exist anymore lol

Guest


Guest

A fair chance to protect oneself? The rational that restricting a law abiding citizen will somehow prevent a crime is faulty. If y'all think that will help in someway then repeal the second amendment. This little step by step crap is tiresome... make the case, please.

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:A fair chance to protect oneself? The rational that restricting a law abiding citizen will somehow prevent a crime is faulty. If y'all think that will help in someway then repeal the second amendment. This little step by step crap is tiresome... make the case, please.

.............................................................

Like your whiny dripping faucet leaking the tears of stone cold fear...?

Mother's milk leads to heroin, and other stupid domino theories.

Guest


Guest

The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

........................

Gimme a break brother. There are already a long list of those dreaded controls in place....restrictions to the 2nd amendment.

You know it's a fact and that makes your spin intellectually dishonest.

Another sensible restriction is not gonna repeal the 2nd Amendment.

That's a false narrative being used by folk standing on their own slippery slope sliding towards irrelevance and the dustbin of history.

The 2nd Amendment will never be set aside....get over it.



othershoe1030

othershoe1030

PkrBum wrote:
Tell me the part about how a background check or other gun control measures will work on crazies and criminals.

I love good fiction.

If you really want a solution you should get off these fractional measures and start door to door confiscations... right?

Just as a law against murder will not prevent murders, still it is there and has an effect of putting violent people behind bars. So too a background check is not a cure-all for getting rid of gun violence but it has had some effect.

Since the existing background-check system began, in 1994, officials have screened more than 108 million people before they could buy a gun, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics; the federal government has blocked 1.9 million attempted purchases because of felony convictions or other problems with the would-be buyers’ background.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/us/background-checks-still-stumbling-block-in-gun-law-overhaul.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Because the constitution does not say you can own assault guns.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Even our right to freedom of speech draws a line around things like not having the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. In other words exercising that right has limits when expressing it in a way that endangers others.

How can you equate having background checks with keeping firearms away from "law abiding" citizens? Wouldn't a law abiding citizen be able to pass a check?

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Even our right to freedom of speech draws a line around things like not having the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. In other words exercising that right has limits when expressing it in a way that endangers others.

How can you equate having background checks with keeping firearms away from "law abiding" citizens? Wouldn't a law abiding citizen be able to pass a check?

If y'all can pretend to believe that having an id to vote is restrictive... I can do it on gun control.

What was the penalty for that million + criminals trying to buy a gun? If you're going to start throwing govt solutions against the wall... please try to target the real problem.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

PkrBum wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Even our right to freedom of speech draws a line around things like not having the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. In other words exercising that right has limits when expressing it in a way that endangers others.

How can you equate having background checks with keeping firearms away from "law abiding" citizens? Wouldn't a law abiding citizen be able to pass a check?

If y'all can pretend to believe that having an id to vote is restrictive... I can do it on gun control.

What was the penalty for that million + criminals trying to buy a gun? If you're going to start throwing govt solutions against the wall... please try to target the real problem.

Voting and buying a firearm is not a valid comparison. Yes, requiring an ID is restrictive. The problem with the voter ID, as has been hashed out at length here is that there was never a voter impersonation problem to begin with. The tactic was used as a means of trying to reduce the number of people who would likely vote in a certain way.

Requiring ID for gun purchases is a way of keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them because they likely are not good citizens or are crazy. Of course if you think people who likely vote Democratic are crazy then maybe the comparison should stand, LOL.

Virginia's background check system has prevented 54,260 people, including more than 16,000 felons, from buying guns since it began in 1989.

The total number of transactions denied from 1989 to 2012 also includes drug abusers, the mentally ill and domestic assault offenders, Virginia State Police records show.

During the same period, state police made 12,956 arrests related to the sale or attempted sale of firearms as a result of denied firearm transactions of all types, conducted between federally licensed firearm dealers and customers at gun stores, gun shows and other retail sales.

"It's positive to see that the Virginia State Police are enforcing the laws on the books," said Thomas R. Baker, a criminologist and an assistant professor of criminal justice studies at Virginia Commonwealth University. "The fact that they actively pursue individuals who try to purchase a gun illegally means the background check system helps to not only keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them, but also helps identify and punish individuals trying to illegally obtain guns."

http://hamptonroads.com/2013/02/stats-show-virginia-gun-background-checks-effective

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Even our right to freedom of speech draws a line around things like not having the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. In other words exercising that right has limits when expressing it in a way that endangers others.

How can you equate having background checks with keeping firearms away from "law abiding" citizens? Wouldn't a law abiding citizen be able to pass a check?

......................................

How many times does it need to be pointed out to them that there are already restrictions in place indexed to the 2nd Amendment...?

It's really not complicated, but they sure want it to be.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:The constitution is clear that the right shall not be infringed... how can you reconcile controls without repeal?

Then, I want my fucking suitcase nuke and a fully-equipped Apache attack helicopter goddamnit!

I need them to feel safe, and it's my constitutional right!

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » I want to ask you liberals a question about the gun thing.

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum