- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
There's no criminal gain. By definition there has to be a mental issue. Sorry.
Boo tends to engage in evasive snarky posts that boil down to a common theme-he thinks people who want to own guns for self defense are less intelligent and less civilized than he is and he wants the government to hassle them
I'm starting to believe that because I know he isn't stupid, and just look at what happened when they tried to ban alcohol. These types of restrictions and bans only benefit street gangs, criminals and murderers. Then the criminal element would be WELL aware that the majority of the law-abiding public would be unarmed and defenseless, and most criminals take advantage of opportunity.
Boo tends to engage in evasive snarky posts that boil down to a common theme-he thinks people who want to own guns for self defense are less intelligent and less civilized than he is and he wants the government to hassle them
There is no out right ban on guns even suggested. So I don't know where that came from. We're speaking go automatic weapons and an increase of back market activity by stupid and mentally I'll people. I was speaking in the content of our conversation.
I have already posted one thread in regards to the mass shootings, trying to bring together ideas on the most effective way to slow gun related violence and try to eliminate these mass shootings.
This poll is more black and white because I am simply wondering would you be in favor of more gun control if it had the potential to reduce violence.
Again, there s no proposed ban on all weapons. None. Nor would I support that.I'm starting to believe that because I know he isn't stupid, and just look at what happened when they tried to ban alcohol. These types of restrictions and bans only benefit street gangs, criminals and murderers. Then the criminal element would be WELL aware that the majority of the law-abiding public would be unarmed and defenseless, and most criminals take advantage of opportunity.
Bans, restrictions, limitations. It doesn't matter. It won't stop BAD people from getting guns. Only GOOD people won't break the law. Criminals are criminals because they break laws. Therefore, your proposal of more laws and restrictions are useless in the bigger scheme of things. You are looking at this situation much too simplistically.
as someone who spent years as a prosecuting attorney I reject that idiocy as not based on our laws many crimes do not result in gain. vandalism for example.
It does matter. There is a difference. Fewer stupid people break such laws because they can't figure it out, and e tally don't usually work hat way, so there will likely be a limiting factor.
90% of the most active anti gun posters on this board are motivated by a desire to hassle, harass or actually oppress people who don't buy into their far left agenda
I would think it would work the opposite way. More stupid people break laws because they don't know any better or because they just don't care. :shrug:
Bans, restrictions, limitations. It doesn't matter. It won't stop BAD people from getting guns. Only GOOD people won't break the law. Criminals are criminals because they break laws. Therefore, your proposal of more laws and restrictions are useless in the bigger scheme of things. You are looking at this situation much too simplistically.
There is gain in vandalism, one of excitement and expression, even if it is just anger. But when you kill children and yourself, with no effort to "get away with it," there is something beyond criminal.
And those 'statistical figures' are backed up by.............. by ............. by what exactly?
That is true, and I still don't understand how you think restrictions would solve that issue. If you don't care about life, then you certainly are not going to let some laws stop you. I don't see any logic here at all. It seems more like a knee-jerk reaction to the latest tragedy than something you've actually thought about and considered carefully.
They break stupid laws. Not black market laws here stupidity might get hem killed.
I cannot believe that the Turtle is an attorney...There's no criminal gain. By definition there has to be a mental issue. Sorry.
That is true, and I still don't understand how you think restrictions would solve that issue. If you don't care about life, then you certainly are not going to let some laws stop you. I don't see any logic here at all. It seems more like a knee-jerk reaction to the latest tragedy than something you've actually thought about and considered carefully.
I merely read their posts, its obvious. especially when they continue to make blatant mistakes about the subject matter or make idiotic claims such as "automatic weapons" etc
I find it amazing that almost every person who wants to restrict OUR rights labels themselves as "progressive" very liberal or has demonstrated that they are one or the other.
I cannot believe that the Turtle is an attorney...
Of course, a good percentage of these mass-murderers were never "criminals" before the act. In this case (Newtown) the "villain, IMO, was the slain mother......and society....and the law....
Now, we must stand up to the NRA and their lackeys(conservatives law-makers).
There must be laws preventing the sale of assault weapons to regular civilians, and there must be 100% background checks....No one, who is not 100% sane and stable , should be allowed to own a gun....
How many more must die until our Congresses act..??
I think you are making a mistake, you think he actually wants to stop accidents, crimes or "the mentally ill" from hurting people
his goal is to harass people he looks down up as benighted because they think having guns for self defense is proper
You got nothing to produce that 90% figure. Thank you for confirming you just pulled it out of thin air.
You got nothing to produce that 90% figure. Thank you for confirming you just pulled it out of thin air.
That doesn't even make any sense though.
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?