Gun Laws

freakzilla wrote:

Just saw on the news that Obama would support a law banning civilians from owning guns. Marshall law will be next.

Its assault rifles, gun show buying, and certain clips, but yeah Obama is a big poosey when it comes to guns.

if assult rifles become illegal be prepared for the cartels to sell to US citizens

you know the ones that our government sold them AKA " Fast and Furious"

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500202_162-57337289/legal-u.s-gun-sales-to-mexico-arming-cartels/

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/10/us/cartels-columbus-new-mexico/index.html

Cu Bu wrote:

are lives the only marker?

how many could be killed by someone who knew how?

Lives are an obviously huge marker.

And some one who knows how to use a gun could kill, or cause way more damage then one who knows how to use a knife. Really not a debateable issue.

Weak argument Cu Bu.

Farmer1906 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Just saw on the news that Obama would support a law banning civilians from owning guns. Marshall law will be next.

Its assault rifles, gun show buying, and certain clips, but yeah Obama is a big poosey when it comes to guns.

So Freak is totally wrong. A pretty common theme in the recent pro gun arguments.

Obama a big pussy? I think ignoring ones convictions in the face of these massacres because of the fear of the pro gun advocates would be much more pussifuss.

captain organic wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Just saw on the news that Obama would support a law banning civilians from owning guns. Marshall law will be next.

Its assault rifles, gun show buying, and certain clips, but yeah Obama is a big poosey when it comes to guns.

So Freak is totally wrong. A pretty common theme in the recent pro gun arguments.

Obama a big pussy? I think ignoring ones convictions in the face of these massacres because of the fear of the pro gun advocates would be much more pussifuss.

I wasn't wrong, the news here must have been wrong.

captain organic wrote:

Cu Bu wrote:

are lives the only marker?

how many could be killed by someone who knew how?

Lives are an obviously huge marker.

And some one who knows how to use a gun could kill, or cause way more damage then one who knows how to use a knife. Really not a debateable issue.

Weak argument Cu Bu.

lives are a big marker the lives of children accosted in any way are likely marred .

you misunderstood me I meant that a competent person trained or that really thought it through could inflict massive damage without a gun. A gun is a great weapon but it can and would be done without it. Most likely one would purchase assault rifles illegally and possibly be hipped to explosives as well. sick and motivated would prevail without a " legal" assault rifle.
how hard is it for you to obtain illegal weed? pills? other drugs?

and if guns are barred what could you do in a preschool or day care with a few chains some locks mace/pepper spray and a blade?

also i noticed you didnt reply to my liberal leaning links citing relevant facts to this problem

I'll get back to those links in a bit Cu Bu.

But I want to reply to an issue in the off topic thread without tainting that thread.

But Homicide rate is 4 x's higher in the US then australia. Sure we can point to examples and say "see gun laws don't stop killings" but when the rates are significantly lower, this anecdotal evidence is non persuasive.

captain organic wrote:

I'll get back to those links in a bit Cu Bu.

But I want to reply to an issue in the off topic thread without tainting that thread.

But Homicide rate is 4 x's higher in the US then australia. Sure we can point to examples and say "see gun laws don't stop killings" but when the rates are significantly lower, this anecdotal evidence is non persuasive.

Is that per capita? Cause after a quick search Australia has 22 million people where the US has 315 million. I'm sure it is because you say "crime rate" but I'm just making sure. More people= more crazy fucks.

The poor ghetto black community really brings Americas rate waaaay down.

Looks like someone is sensitive. The black population makes up 13% of total pop yet over 50% of the murders.

captain organic wrote:

I'll get back to those links in a bit Cu Bu.

please take your time, interested in a response that does not implicate conservatives if you could manage it

shot out to you birdman

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/sales-soar-kid-themed-body-armor-backpacks-171359967.html


thoughts?

Farmer1906 wrote:

Looks like someone is sensitive. The black population makes up 13% of total pop yet over 50% of the murders.

Farmer's right, the poor black communities are the biggest problem in the US. Brutal crime rates, little hope of upward mobility, major drain on the system. Unfortunately neither side of the aisle has any solid ideas as to how fix the problem. Lib's want to continue giving the tit when we should be way beyond that point in development, and red's just want to walk away with a "not our problem" attitude. Well given on how these communities came to be, Gov't does have a responsibility, but the solution is clearly not what the dem's are serving up.

OU wrote:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/sales-soar-kid-themed-body-armor-backpacks-171359967.html


thoughts?

I guess, but it's terrible that it has even come to this.

Of coarse this only protects the kid(and only part of the kid) while the back pack is worn, which is a very short period of time. Prob wouldn't have come into play in Conn.

captain organic wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

Looks like someone is sensitive. The black population makes up 13% of total pop yet over 50% of the murders.

Farmer's right, the poor black communities are the biggest problem in the US. Brutal crime rates, little hope of upward mobility, major drain on the system. Unfortunately neither side of the aisle has any solid ideas as to how fix the problem. Lib's want to continue giving the tit when we should be way beyond that point in development, and red's just want to walk away with a "not our problem" attitude. Well given on how these communities came to be, Gov't does have a responsibility, but the solution is clearly not what the dem's are serving up.

How did these communities come to be?

playing dumb again?

captain organic wrote:

playing dumb again?

Just want clarification on what you mean.

Farmer1906 wrote:

captain organic wrote:

playing dumb again?

Just want clarification on what you mean.

Well to start there was a couple centuries of gov't sponsored oppression.

OU wrote:

captain organic wrote:

I'll get back to those links in a bit Cu Bu.

But I want to reply to an issue in the off topic thread without tainting that thread.

But Homicide rate is 4 x's higher in the US then australia. Sure we can point to examples and say "see gun laws don't stop killings" but when the rates are significantly lower, this anecdotal evidence is non persuasive.

Is that per capita? Cause after a quick search Australia has 22 million people where the US has 315 million. I'm sure it is because you say "crime rate" but I'm just making sure. More people= more crazy fucks.

yes, per capita.

WinstonSmith wrote:

www.obamalies.net

Is there something about gun laws in there somewhere?

captain organic wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

www.obamalies.net

Is there something about gun laws in there somewhere?

Perhaps not,but when Obama comes out and spews his anti-gun rhetoric remember he has a track record of being full of shit.

WinstonSmith wrote:

captain organic wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

www.obamalies.net

Is there something about gun laws in there somewhere?

Perhaps not,but when Obama comes out and spews his anti-gun rhetoric remember he has a track record of being full of shit.

You don't think he is genuine about making changes when it comes to guns?

OU wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

captain organic wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

www.obamalies.net

Is there something about gun laws in there somewhere?

Perhaps not,but when Obama comes out and spews his anti-gun rhetoric remember he has a track record of being full of shit.

You don't think he is genuine about making changes when it comes to guns?

You have a point there,but his logic is without merit and Professorr John Lott has pointed this out in his books.

WinstonSmith wrote:

OU wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

captain organic wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

www.obamalies.net

Is there something about gun laws in there somewhere?

Perhaps not,but when Obama comes out and spews his anti-gun rhetoric remember he has a track record of being full of shit.

You don't think he is genuine about making changes when it comes to guns?

You have a point there,but his logic is without merit and Professorr John Lott has pointed this out in his books.

No merit to his logic? Are you saying there is no reason to beleive that stricter gun laws would lower the rate of deadly shootings?