Deadly shooting on Oregon college campus

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

Quote:
Even Chris Rock says in his stand-up routine, "if Ammo cost $5 grand there would be no more innocent by-standers".

If ammo cost $5 grand, then only the 1% would own weapons because they would be the only ones who could afford to buy the ammo. Ones ability to make money doesn't always reflect their intelligence or skills. Look at Honey Boo Boo and the Kardashians...

((And thats the point, it was a joke,,,,,but its interesting to me that only 1% of the population controls 99% of the nations wealth while the remaining 99% controls a whopping 1%. Thank you for elaborating on the premise))

Do you propose an intelligence test to get a firearm?

((An intelligence test, are you kidding???? Then all the morons with 14 teeth or less will be whining about how unfair it is that only responsible people get to buy guns. I don't want to hear the bellyaching about the elites v joe six-pack, Even Cheney managed to shoot a hunting buddy in the face and I guess he has 15 or more of the original))

I've already expressed my view that its a terrible thing to find out your child has been murdered while at school or in church or in a theater. Apparently some of you think this is strictly a constitutional threat. It's ok, I get it, I'm not in favor of altering the second amendment nor in favor of limiting a woman choice to make decisions regarding her health, reproductive or otherwise. So, I'll bid all you patriots adieu, have fun.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Quote:

I've already expressed my view that its a terrible thing to find out your child has been murdered while at school or in church or in a theater.

But it seems that the many hundreds of teenagers and some children and adults that are killed ever damn year in the inner cities are ok as long as it home boys doing the killings.

Some of them are killed in their own beds in their own homes IE no need to go to the theater.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

I don't understand why concern has to be either/or. Violence in inner cities does need to be addressed as well as massive shootings. In event, it all leads back to guns either got legitimately or by loopholes or by however gang members and such get their guns. I think it may have to do with gun runs and selling in the back end of cars but I am ignorant on that and won't pretend otherwise.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

The drug trade is worth billions a year and fuel the inner cities gangs so they are going to have plenty of firearms no matter what.

Mexico have very strict guns laws on their books but the drug gangs have no problem getting weapons not only from the US but from the world.

All such strict guns laws does in made sure that honest citizens are likely to be defenseless from the criminal elements.

Guns in any case is not the problem stupid laws such as the drug laws that allow such criminal enterprises is the problem.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

I have never bought the argument that criminals are going to get their guns anyway so why bother to have laws. The same can be said for any law.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

But a law that interfere with honest citizens being able to defend themselves while not doing any good as far as disarming the criminals is stupid.

Other then making the anti-gun people happy such laws are not only worthless but harmful.

I feel for the poor Mexicans overrun with arm drugs gangs that have no problems doing mass murders with laws that will send them to prison for having bullets let alone firearms.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Build a bomb or carry a knife if you want to defend yourself Bill.

You argue that no one needs a gun to kill but then you argue that guns are the best defense. You can't have it both ways.

1 Reply

@parados,

Why can't it be both ways? You want to mix up the use of a gun in self-defense against people using it to commit crimes or go on killing sprees. It seems you are the one who wants it your way only. Gangs will continue to get guns for the very reason Bill mentions. They will be provided to them by their drug supplyers. After all, which drug lord wants a gang that can't protect his product and their own turf?

You argue for stricter gun laws but only focus on the mass shootings. This is your sole purpose for stricter gun laws. A majority of gun crimes and murders are not related to mass shootings in the general sense, ie: schools. These are not even the majority of shootings in the US, but they are the easiest to use as propaganda, because they usually involve kids and or children. You never account for how people are to keep themselves protected in their homes.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

I see you have decided to continue to misrepresent my arguments in many ways.

2 Replies

@parados,

How do you figure? You don't want any one having guns, so you leave people defenseless because you are concerned about the minority of mass shootings in the US. You use children as a weapon to limit people's Constitutional rights to firearms. I don't think I've misrepresented you at all. You have made yourself quite clear in your stances.

Every post degrades the person you are "debating", and misrepresents what they have said. As noted above, children are your favorite weapon choice because anyone that wants to go against what is good for the children is in favor of guns and the killing of children. Everyone who has a gun is a threat unless they concede to your "common sense" gun laws.

What have I misrepresented?

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

Jesus. What have you NOT misrepresented? No one is saying take everyone's guns away, or any of that crap you keep twisting.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

I have never bought the argument that criminals are going to get their guns anyway so why bother to have laws. The same can be said for any law.

What the US should do is make murder illegal. That should put a stop to all this nonsense.

0 Replies

@snood,

You don't think it is misrepresenting someone views when they don't agree with what is being called "common sense" gun laws, and the response is "You just want to see more dead children?" "You must have one hell of a jerk off session last night, as x number of kids were killed in a school." Have the anti-gun groups and lobbies not used children as their pawns in the gun control fight? "It's all about the kids!!!" Support our laws or see more dead children? This is the crap that has been pushed by the anti-gun crowd. Parados is one of the very people who speaks this way when discussing gun control laws. Tries to back people into positions they didn't state to get them in a gotcha moment. He is one of the most disingenuous posters on this site.

Did you think my idea on gun laws was reasonable?

1 Reply

@snood,

snood wrote:

No one is saying take everyone's guns away,

That is because the Democratic Party always lies about their goals.

They very much intend to take everyone's guns away.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

They very much intend to take everyone's guns away.

So they want a gun "regulation law" stricter than in any other country?

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

Thanks for your effort to give this detailed explanation.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

Thanks for the detailed explanation.

Don't forget the multispecies society there. Do you see how well we get along with dinosaurs?

Too bad they aren't invading Europe.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Quote:

You don't want any one having guns

I have never said no one should have guns. I have only pointed out that the argument that IF no one had guns, people would instantly resort to bombs and bombs are more devastating is a bull **** argument. Most people couldn't build a bomb and most shootings aren't planned with enough time to build a bomb.

Quote:

you leave people defenseless

People without guns are not defenseless. There are many ways to defend oneself without a gun. IF we accept the argument that knives and bombs are just as deadly if not more deadly than guns would leave us with both of those as defensive weapons equal to guns.

Quote:

You use children as a weapon to limit people's Constitutional rights to firearms

I didn't realize it was children that were going to school at a community college. Perhaps you could tell me what you think the age for children is in your view.

Quote:

children are your favorite weapon choice because anyone that wants to go against what is good for the children is in favor of guns and the killing of children.

Repeating your misrepresentation still doesn't make it my argument.

Quote:

Everyone who has a gun is a threat unless they concede to your "common sense" gun laws.

Which laws are those? I don't recall advocating any specific "common sense" gun laws. I have only pointed out that Bill and Oralloy's arguments are bull **** when they argue about guns and knives.

Quote:

What have I misrepresented?

I count at least 4 things.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Quote:

You don't think it is misrepresenting someone views when they don't agree with what is being called "common sense" gun laws, and the response is "You just want to see more dead children?"

Could you point out this exchange between us because I don't recall it ever happening.

0 Replies

Deadly shooting on Oregon college campus

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know