Guns, guns, guns, guns

Taichiliberal said:
Interesting graph....the sheet wearers that put it together are unaware that all the non-US countries have populations that are NOT "white"....and there's no break down of them. Also no dates, no raw number of homicides committed that were in the tally. Is is saying that 19.8% of 100,000 gun homicides were committed by black folk? Hmmm, given that the black population of America hovers a little over 30 million, were talking a fraction less of 1% of the population. The population of America hovers around 330 million.

And what's that ration of black mass shooters to whites again?

So the stat game that our pointy hooded palookas love to play just doesn't add up, make much sense when they attach their conclusion du jour. Not surprising....small wonder why I have dopes like Lionfish on ignore.
Click to expand...

So you consider the WHO and the CDC to be 'sheet wearers', eh?
 
bhbfnbd-jpg.1175139
 
RB 60 said:
How can I debate something I cannot see? How is that "disdain"?

Yes, I am unwilling to pay for a subscription I have no interest in,
and I won't waste my money just to pacify you.
Click to expand...

For the reading audience: I don't pay for NY Times on-line. They will allow free reads for a time, then require a subscription before reading. I used up my free reads awhile back. Sometimes a google search/link will produce a NY Times article that does NOT require a subscription demand for reading....don't ask me why. That's why I posted this article, of which a quick scroll past all the ad nonsense will show the article.

RB was just too quick to conclude he needed a subscription. The objective, rational and intellectually honest reader will see other wise

Once Banned, Now Loved and Loathed: How the AR-15 Became ‘America’s Rifle’

By Ali Watkins, John Ismay and Thomas Gibbons-Neff
March 3, 2018



https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/03/us/politics/ar-15-americas-rifle.html
 
Into the Night said:
Shoot back. End of problem.
Click to expand...

That, in fact, exacerbates the problem significantly. I know, I know like all keyboard warriors, you are a great shot and would never miss and the excruciating pressure of a gun fight would never cause you to panic. I've read crap like that many times. In fact, guns are the problem, not the solution.
 
Taichiliberal said:
For the reading audience: I don't pay for NY Times on-line. They will allow free reads for a time, then require a subscription before reading. I used up my free reads awhile back. Sometimes a google search/link will produce a NY Times article that does NOT require a subscription demand for reading....don't ask me why. That's why I posted this article, of which a quick scroll past all the ad nonsense will show the article.

RB was just too quick to conclude he needed a subscription. The objective, rational and intellectually honest reader will see other wise

Once Banned, Now Loved and Loathed: How the AR-15 Became ‘America’s Rifle’

By Ali Watkins, John Ismay and Thomas Gibbons-Neff
March 3, 2018



https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/03/us/politics/ar-15-americas-rifle.html
Click to expand...

It is unconstitutional to ban or limit any weapon, including the AR-15 design.
 
Nordberg said:
That, in fact, exacerbates the problem significantly.
Click to expand...
No. It ends the problem.
Nordberg said:
I know, I know like all keyboard warriors, you are a great shot and would never miss and the excruciating pressure of a gun fight would never cause you to panic.
Click to expand...
I'm generally a good shot.
Nordberg said:
I've read crap like that many times.
Click to expand...
So?
Nordberg said:
In fact, guns are the problem, not the solution.
Click to expand...
Guns aren't a problem. It is unconstitutional to ban or limit any gun.
 
Nordberg said:
Is it allowed for a child to have a gun?
Click to expand...
Yes, subject to their parents controls. A child is a minor living under their parent's controls.
Nordberg said:
It seems they are trying to charge the father. With what? Following the Constitution.
Click to expand...
Apparently.
Nordberg said:
The kid's gun rights are being infringed.
Click to expand...
The father's. The kid's gun rights are subject to the father's controls. The government has NO jurisdiction in the matter.
 
Into the Night said:
Yes, subject to their parents controls. A child is a minor living under their parent's controls.

Apparently.

The father's. The kid's gun rights are subject to the father's controls. The government has NO jurisdiction in the matter.
Click to expand...

The parent did not care, therefore it is legal. Don't infringe on that kid's right to a gun, The 2nd says nothing about age or restrictions in your demented mind. The parents had no controls. So you agree the kid should have his 2nd amendment gun.
As usual, you make no sense and cannot understand when you are wrong.
 
Nordberg said:
The parent did not care, therefore it is legal. Don't infringe on that kid's right to a gun, The 2nd says nothing about age or restrictions in your demented mind. The parents had no controls. So you agree the kid should have his 2nd amendment gun.
As usual, you make no sense and cannot understand when you are wrong.
Click to expand...

The kid has the right to self defense. Yes...that includes the use of a gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top