Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You are being gratuitously stupid.

No I'm not.

MontereyJack wrote:

If someone dies in a car wreck do you say he would be just as dead if he died from flu and forget about it or do you try to make cars safer. Hint: we have spent a century making cars safer. Another hint: it is the guns

Your efforts to outlaw pistol grips have nothing to do with making anything safer.

Not to mention the fact that making guns safer won't prevent any murders.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You certainly are. Your pretense thadt it is about pistol grips proves it. And as usual you miss the point, which is about dealing with what the actual reality is which is available
Both gun murder not other means of murder. As usual your arguments are nonsense which is why they are always simply laughed T.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You certainly are.

No I’m not.

MontereyJack wrote:

Your pretense thadt it is about pistol grips proves it.

No pretense. Your efforts to outlaw pistol grips are entirely about trying to outlaw pistol grips.

MontereyJack wrote:

And as usual you miss the point, which is about dealing with what the actual reality is which is available
Both gun murder not other means of murder.

I never miss the point.

I am well aware of your obsession with trivia regarding which type of weapon a murder victim is killed with. Despite this obsession, murder victims are just as dead no matter what sort of weapons are used to kill them.

If you are suggesting that other means of committing murder are not available to murderers, that is incorrect. They can’t even keep knives out of the hands of inmates in high security prisons. And even without knives, murderers can still kill with their bare hands. Unless you are proposing to keep the entire population of America in supermax-style solitary confinement for their entire lives, there is nothing that you can do to prevent murderers from killing people.

MontereyJack wrote:

As usual your arguments are nonsense

I do not share the common progressive opinion that facts and logic are nonsense.

MontereyJack wrote:

which is why they are always simply laughed at.

Progressive contempt for facts and logic says more about progressives than it does anything else.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
You're confused.

I'm naturally immune to confusion.

Heh.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
No they don't.

That is incorrect.

Nuh-uh.

oralloy wrote:

https://hwfo.substack.com/p/everybodys-lying-about-the-link-between

That doesn't address what I wrote.

1 Reply

@Teaball,

Teaball wrote:

Have any of us considered any possible ulterior motives for government taking from the law abiding citizen the right to bear firearms?

Where has the government taken from the law abiding citizens the right to bear firearms?

Teaball wrote:

Would that also take firearms from criminals that normally violate the law?

There are federal restrictions to gun possession by persons convicted of certain crimes and misdemeanors

Teaball wrote:

Would that assure us against the possibility for rogue governmental officials to to take advantage of the citizen's having no firearms to do evil to the citizen? Hmmmmmm. I think we should think that over a little more.

Rogue government officials should be dealt with by the authorities.

The firearms allowed to the law abiding citizens would be no match for the weapons at the disposal of a rogue government.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Hello Monteray-Jack,

May I add a few questions and comments to the conversation?

Is a gun able to kill without a user? Is it the gun that decides to kill? Wouldn't the murder rate from other weapons have greatly increased in the absence of guns?

Beside homicides, what about murders by lawless criminals from outside of the home? Isn't it laughable that while some would so highly prioritize outlawing the ownership of guns by law abiding citizen, the same would go along with increasing funding for carrying out procedures to murder unborn children (abortion) payable by a fee? The death rate of such is much higher. Besides the fee, a heavy toll is exacted on the deceived mother's conscience and health. Hmmm.

My concern is the danger of rogue government officials that may along with lawless criminals take advantage of unarmed citizenship to do harm to the citizen. It's easy to find ways to make the road to such injustice appear justifiable.

Also shouldn't we consider the Biblical Character King Ahasuerus found in the book of Esther? After finding himself having been duped by a rogue official into making an irreversible decree to destroy the Jews from which came Queen Esther that he much loved, he ended up making another decree for the Jews to arm themselves for protection against any that may try to carry out the former decree. What if the American citizens had no weapons when the British attacked during the beginning of the Revolutionary War?

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

To answer your question, "Where has the government taken from the law abiding citizens the right to bear firearms?",

I was speaking of IF the right to bear arms was taken from the law abiding citizen by those that want to take away guns, not that it was already taken away.

1 Reply

@Teaball,

Seeing as how it would be a violation of the Constitution, assuming amendments weren't passed by the legislature repealing the 2nd amendment, it would be a symptom of a much, much larger problem.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

stupid. pretty hard for murderers to commit a parkland massacre or a steve paddock style las vegas massacre with their bare hands. with ar15s they;re chilkd's play to commit. dumb dumb dumb.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You are being gratuitously stupid. If someone dies in a car wreck do you say he would be just as dead if he died from flu and forget about it or do you try to make cars safer. Hint: we have spent a century making cars safer. Another hint: it is the guns
..

Guns work marvelously, just like they are suppose to - most of the time. A relatively simple invention. It is the absolute fools holding them that is so dangerous!

1 Reply

@BillW,

You and o are kinda ,issomg my point, which is that you work to solve whatever p[oblem you're confronted with, you don't try to shift it to something else that isn't relevant. the prroblem is guns are killing innocent people. saying they'd be just as dead if they died in some other way is irrelevant and dumb as it gets.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Nuh-uh.

That is incorrect. Statistics show that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

InfraBlue wrote:

That doesn't address what I wrote.

It proves that what you wrote is wrong.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Where has the government taken from the law abiding citizens the right to bear firearms?

It does so every single time it outlaws pistol grips on long guns.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

pretty hard for murderers to commit a parkland massacre . . . with their bare hands.

But easy enough for them to do it with a knife.

MontereyJack wrote:

pretty hard for murderers to commit . . . a steve paddock style las vegas massacre with their bare hands.

That's why bump stocks are now outlawed.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You and o are kinda missing my point, which is that you work to solve whatever problem you're confronted with, you don't try to shift it to something else that isn't relevant.

Actually that is exactly what you do every time you insist on laws against pistol grips.

Your laws against pistol grips are utterly irrelevant to any issues of gun violence.

MontereyJack wrote:

the problem is guns are killing innocent people.

I do not agree that it matters which method murderers use to kill their victims.

But, your laws against pistol grips do nothing to address this issue in any case.

MontereyJack wrote:

saying they'd be just as dead if they died in some other way is irrelevant

That is incorrect. Saying that I do not agree that this is a problem is entirely relevant.

You may not agree with my conclusion. But I am directly addressing the issue.

MontereyJack wrote:

and dumb as it gets.

Yet you cannot counter my claim that it doesn't matter by explaining how it possibly matters which method murderers use to kill their victims.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You're confused.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

One can still bear firearms.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

That's like saying "one can still talk about the weather" after the government outlaws criticism of its policies.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

You're confused.

That's highly unlikely. I'm naturally immune to confusion.

I'm not saying that it's absolutely impossible. But there are more likely scenarios than me being confused.

The most likely scenario is: "I'm completely correct in every respect."

1 Reply

@oralloy,

you're confused about not being confusable. flat out.

1 Reply

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know