The vast majority of gun owners in this country are law-abiding citizens

WinterBorn said:
When you make blanket statements like that
Click to expand...

So you follow up with a blanket statement?

bravo said:
How many auto accident deaths are acceptable ?

How many swimming accident deaths are acceptable ?

How many drug realated deaths are acceptable ?

Getting the picture ?

Must I go on ?
Click to expand...

Death by gun is second only to vehicle accidents. Neither is right. A car is not a lethal weapon. A car was not designed to kill. Nor are swimming pools.

Drugs? Good let's get rid of them too. How many drug related crimes involve guns? Without a gun, do you think that drug related crime will decrease?
 
Howey said:
So you follow up with a blanket statement?
Click to expand...

What blanket statement? That I could take you to 25 homes and show you totally responsible gun owners?

Or was my calling your statement ridiculous what you mean?


You called every gun owner irresponsible. I find that to be bullshit. I notice you have no defense of it, nor have you retracted it. Why is that?
 
Vallista said:
Second amendment is not problem. government has the right and have curb the second amendment to suit modern times. That is why people can't own weapons of mass destruction.
Click to expand...

Maybe when you far left nutjobs decide to negotiate in good faith and use some simple logic we can agree that some rights are just not absolute......
That some rights need to have limits if even only for the sake of decency......

That goes for freedom of speech
Gun rights
Abortion rights
Property rights
Privacy rights
etc.....

There is no need to let people freely liable and smear others with lies
There is no need to allow people to have weapons that are clearly designed for the military and war
There is no need to allow women to kill their babies on a whim because their fear getting far or have a headache
There is no need to allow some property owners to hamstring and stand in the way of projects that benefit the majority of citizens
etc.
 
Howey said:
So you follow up with a blanket statement?



Death by gun is second only to vehicle accidents. Neither is right. A car is not a lethal weapon. A car was not designed to kill. Nor are swimming pools.

Drugs? Good let's get rid of them too. How many drug related crimes involve guns? Without a gun, do you think that drug related crime will decrease?
Click to expand...


Guns are also meant to prevent YOU from being killed or just to entertain yourself with targets or skeet.....just as drugs can meant to prevent you from getting sick

You're full of shit and you know it....
 
Bijou said:
Oh, please. When's the last time your neighborhood was under siege?

This idea that we all need guns to defend ourselves (from what exactly?) has become an ingrained part of our culture and is propped up by the phony notion that we all need to exercise our 'rights' by owning guns. That's just a thumbnail sketch of the problem. We've allowed the NRA and gun nuts dictate to the entire country how important this 'freedom' is. Well, fine - then get used to the idea that with this 'freedom' comes nuts like James Holmes, exercising his 'right' to own guns, and doing with said guns what guns were designed to do: kill people. Quit acting shocked and hurt over it. This is what comes with what you want so stop sniveling.
Click to expand...

Could you possibly be a bigger simpleton?

Holmes was not "exercising his right to own guns," he was committing mass murder. Furthermore, no one is saying "we all need guns" or that "we all need to exercise our rights by owning guns." No one is forcing you or anyone else to own a gun. What we are saying is, don't infringe on others' constitutional right to do so. You don't want a gun? Fine, I guarantee no one will force you to buy one. You, and others like you, on the other hand, feel compelled to force people like me to give up a right our founding fathers felt was very important. What's next? The First Amendment? Because I'll tell you this, if you take the Second, there's no way to defend the First, or any of the other rights enumerated in the Constitution.

How will stricter gun laws bring an end to criminals having guns, when the laws against murder have not been able to stop them from killing innocent people?

In Aurora it is already unlawful to carry a concealed "dangerous weapon," discharge firearms (unless by law enforcement on duty or on shooting range), and have loaded firearm in motor vehicle. These laws Didn't to stop Holmes and they won't stop any other criminal.
 
C
Norman Paperman said:
Could you possibly be a bigger simpleton?

Holmes was not "exercising his right to own guns," he was committing mass murder. Furthermore, no one is saying "we all need guns" or that "we all need to exercise our rights by owning guns." No one is forcing you or anyone else to own a gun. What we are saying is, don't infringe on others' constitutional right to do so. You don't want a gun? Fine, I guarantee no one will force you to buy one. You, and others like you, on the other hand, feel compelled to force people like me to give up a right our founding fathers felt was very important. What's next? The First Amendment? Because I'll tell you this, if you take the Second, there's no way to defend the First, or any of the other rights enumerated in the Constitution.

How will stricter gun laws bring an end to criminals having guns, when the laws against murder have not been able to stop them from killing innocent people?

In Aurora it is already unlawful to carry a concealed "dangerous weapon," discharge firearms (unless by law enforcement on duty or on shooting range), and have loaded firearm in motor vehicle. These laws Didn't to stop Holmes and they won't stop any other criminal.
Click to expand...

Oh, look Norman returns and is still cranky!
 
King of Owls said:
and it's well worth it.
Click to expand...


the families of the dead will be glad to know their loved ones died for your poltical purposes?


somehow I dont think the two small children who had their mothers head blown open or the dead six year olds family would agree
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top