- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Nope...not there.
what about them?
No, but when you ask how a felon can get a clearance, I'm telling you it's not that hard. It all depends on who you are, what you may be looking at, and the security level of the facility. A person working for a contractor in a lower security facility does not get the same level of scrutiny in many cases as most would assume. You would be surprised at how few honest Americans would pass a rigorous security review.
Nope...not there.
I thought I was pretty clear in my post, but let me repost the relevant material "***arm their soldiers with a gun as a primary weapon***, as opposed to blades?".
Are you saying those bayanets are their "primary" weapons?
How does that address my argument? And going by your logic "hands and fists" would be more deadly than a shotgun.
Buncha mother****ers killed with edged weapons...just sayin
Combat has changed over time due to technology, but in close combat, the blade becomes as important as the gun.No, even in close combat scenarios the choice is still a gun. Case in point, when the seal team entered OBL's compound, they didn't break out a bunch of swords and axes
Let's not travel down the road of assigning what other people say in your mind shall we?
No, that is clearly the logical implication of your argument. That if an item is responsible for more deaths (though we would need to ignore the hand gun figure for it to even be valid) then it is more deadly. Well, in your chart, "hands and fists" are responsible for more deaths than shotguns.
So by your logic, those hands and fists are more deadly
Stick to what is actually said, and I did not say that knives, hands, or fists are more deadly than a shotgun. Just that they are used more in murders than rifles...That is a fact, backed up by FBI stats.
No, you directly replied to a post where I was pointing out guns are more deadly with knives with "Then you would lose..."
No, even in close combat scenarios the choice is still a gun. Case in point, when the seal team entered OBL's compound, they didn't break out a bunch of swords and axes
No, that is clearly the logical implication of your argument. That if an item is responsible for more deaths (though we would need to ignore the hand gun figure for it to even be valid) then it is more deadly. Well, in your chart, "hands and fists" are responsible for more deaths than shotguns.
So by your logic, those hands and fists are more deadly
No, you directly replied to a post where I was pointing out guns are more deadly with knives with "Then you would lose..."
*Sigh* I do remember seeing on, I think it was the history channel, where they tackled this question of which was more deadly....They did a test with experts using one person with a holstered gun, and the other with a sheathed knife....The knife won 9 times out of 10....
Now if you really want to break it down to sheer killing force of a bullet traveling at the speeds a bullet travels, as compared to the force of a knife in different areas of impact/entry, then it is clear that a bullet does more damage. But any argument on a semantical level that deep in is, as far as I am concerned, useless.
No, removing someone's ability to acquire a gun legally would clearly limit their ability to buy guns.
Is it just me, or is there a lot more (D)'s than (R)'s in there?
Are you even from this country?
Yeah, but they likely were using swords, as opposed to guns because guns were not available. This would also explain why you no longer see armies employing swords as their main weapon in the modern world (at least by choice)
Yes.
No, you're probably just misinterpreting the comment
Paranoia + Insomnia + Hearing Voices.
The Trifecta for a shooter.
DC gunman was suffering host of mental issues prior to shooting, report says | Fox News
No doubt, and if he'd only have been white, and a tea partier, then there would non stop meetings at MSNBC on speaker phone with the WH over how to outright hammer this....And I am sure that the SPLC would issue a new warning on how the tea party was a terror organization.
Are you sure?Then you would lose...
"The number cited for rifles was somewhat less precise. While it’s true that the FBI counted 323 murders by rifles, the agency also counted 1,587 murders by an undetermined type of firearm and 97 by "other guns." If gun usage in these two categories followed the same pattern as other gun homicides, that would add another 75 or so murders by rifle, making an estimate for the number of rifle murders about 400, rather than 323.
Still, the larger point holds: Murders by knives, blunt objects and body parts each individually outweighed those committed using a rifle."
PolitiFact | Facebook post says more people were murdered with knives, body parts or blunt objects than with rifles
"you guys"? who is "you guys"? Americans? Constitutionalists? Gun owners? I fail to see how you come to the conclusion that a law abiding gun owner is at fault here.
First, you won't likely be successful at evidencing such "probabilities" in a robust way. But worse, please review your reasoning on this. One can take your same "reasoning" and apply it to the ownership of swimming pools. Or automobiles. If you want to eliminate probability of death, you'd never have children and the species would die out. Your reasoning is shown to be absurd. I use to argue your same point until I paid attention to the arguments, just so you know.Whomever so fearlessly fights for their right to bare weapons is also enabling a reality to be killed by guns more probable. That is "you guys."
I have a question, Did Aaron Alexis break the law Yesterday?
Since he did, why does anyone think he would care about any of the other laws
he may have broken.
No I'm not. Tougher gun laws do not restrict anyone from purchasing a weapon. It would only make the black market more robust and create more problems. Just like the war on drugs.
Whomever so fearlessly fights for their right to bare weapons is also enabling a reality to be killed by guns more probable. That is "you guys."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?