I also agree with your last statement, the problem is "the toothpaste is already out of the tube" Guns are a reality in this society, disarming law abiding citizens is not the answer, nor is it even a possibility.
"Chill out Gag, Obama is NOT going to come after your guns"???
I distinctly remember several of you telling me that before Obama got elected, and I remember disagreeing strongly given his longstanding anti gun stance. Well to all of you that said I had NOTHING to worry about, all I can say is "I told you so"
The man can even let these poor people bury their families before launching an anti gun campaign, not withstanding the fact that even the strongest gun laws we can think of would NOT have stopped this racist puke from carrying out this heinous crime. If anything it bolsters the argument that more law abiding citizens should be armed, not less.
That says we should be fearful of ISIS, in the U.S.
If that is indeed true, why would anyone want to get rid of their guns?
Obama (and the rest of us anti-gunners) have not changed our tune.
Most citizens are barely able to drive 3000 lbs metal safely (they text, talk on the phone, eat... anything but pay attention to what's around them) why should I trust them to act in a disciplined and efficient manner when the shit starts flying around? A bunch of well-intentioned (i.e., let's stop that there criminals) and lawfully armed citizens is one of the most dangerous things that I can envision....
I would wager $5 against your $0.05 that Mr Roof (?) purchased that Glock 45 lawfully and had the states' blessing to carry it around... To your point (unfortunately for me) Massachusetts and Vermont are polar opposites regarding gun control laws, yet they are tops in terms of least number of murders by firearm, nicht war?
OK, I'll take my punishment now...
Obama has ALWAYS been a rabid antigunner, but lefty after lefty back in '08 tried to convince me otherwise
And I would be all for eliminating ALL guns, if it were possible, but it's not physically possible to round up hundreds of millions of guns from both law abiding citizens and criminals alike. As long as criminals have guns, so will I. More laws are not the answer if we don't even enforce the laws already on the books. Depriving law abiding citizens the right to protect themselves because of the acts of criminals is not the answer, the only people benefitting from that will be the criminals themselves as they will know that armed resistance is unlikely
Have you ever wondered why crime is so low out in the country where police response is measured in hours rather than minutes? It's because breaking into a farmhouse is not going to get you arrested, it's going to get you shot. Criminals are cowards, just like most predators they prey on the weak, not the strong. I plan on remaining one of the strong. I can't stop all crime, but I can make myself a very unattractive target.
the density of targets it's much lower in the countryside (as well as the # of getaway routes)? Not to mention the investment of getting there and back. As you said, criminals are cowards (and lazy, in my opinion)...
We have large number of alienated folks with relatively easy access to weapons. That is our problem as a society...
I also agree with your last statement, the problem is "the toothpaste is already out of the tube" Guns are a reality in this society, disarming law abiding citizens is not the answer, nor is it even a possibility.
You are clueless. Have ever seen a real farm?
If criminals are cowards then, gun worshippers justifying they need guns to protect themselves, their family and home are worse than cowards.
Is there anyone here fluent in moron that can translate this gibberish into English?
Other than that, they are polar opposites.
What is the population of Vermont compared to Mass?
Next you will be comparing violent crimes in California to Wyoming
Did you actually read my post before writing your response? Cuz it surely doesn't look like it....
Hmmmm. Funny thing is that Switzerland has the highest ownership of guns on the planet and also has the lowest rate of crime. Private ownership of guns in Russia is illegal. However, the crime rate in Russia is very high. Just like every Leftist you make no sense about much of anything. Have you ever pondered how an apartment or condo dweller in New York City protects themselves against thugs? What do they do when thugs break in or try to break into their dwellings at 2 am? The police on average are at least 20 minutes away and that is if you have time to call 911 in the dark and just out of a sound sleep. Hey, a baseball bat or knife won't cut it. But, of course Leftists don't think about consequences. Only about what is politically correct within their agenda.
Most citizens are barely able to drive 3000 lbs metal safely (they text, talk on the phone, eat... anything but pay attention to what's around them) why should I trust them to act in a disciplined and efficient manner when the shit starts flying around? A bunch of well-intentioned (i.e., let's stop that there criminals) and lawfully armed citizens is one of the most dangerous things that I can envision....
I would wager $5 against your $0.05 that Mr Roof (?) purchased that Glock 45 lawfully and had the states' blessing to carry it around... To your point (unfortunately for me) Massachusetts and Vermont are polar opposites regarding gun control laws, yet they are tops in terms of least number of murders by firearm, nicht war?
OK, I'll take my punishment now...
...on 1/13/2008: "Obama would take away even my semi auto Remington I hunt doves with."
Timmy followed that prescient statement up with this prediction:
"Don't worry he ain't gonna be President though as he will never beat Hillary."
http://theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=56639&boardID=39&page=
quadseasonal had this response to Timmy's prediction about Hillary:
" Hillary could easily shoot herself in the foot ..of course her supporters are too dim to notice"
http://theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=56648&boardID=39&page=
quad doesn't seem so stupid in hindsight, does he? Of course, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Too bad you didn't award the SPOTY in 2008. It may have gone to a righty for a change, instead of always being awarded to lefties.
"Barack Obama has NO intentions of taking away 2nd. Amendement rights"
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=59993&boardID=39&page
but there were others as well.
For the record, I like Moosie, even if we disagree on a LOT.
As for the SPOTY, FatVern is hardly a leftie, and he is a frontrunner for SPOTY every year.
If I recall correctly liorr was still here for the first SPOTY as well, but I think he got kicked off the board before the year was over. That's always been the problem with the SPOTY's, the most deserving posters rarely make it an entire year.
even allow having a loaded shotgun under your bed.
-- Modified on 6/21/2015 9:23:13 AM
-- Modified on 6/21/2015 9:23:13 AM
-- Modified on 6/21/2015 9:23:13 AM
There is difference between making all guns illegal and common sense gun control laws.
Nothing but hyperbole to get illiterate gun owners riled up about nothing.
There were 246 killings during Obama presidency, which part of common sense gun control your little Garbage brain grasp. Suppose, with Garbage like you, it is K for some deranged moron to walk into a church, schools, a movie theater, or any public gathering place to shoot and kill innocent people.
You live in an open carry state, suppose your life in Texas got enriched after open carry went into effect.
WTF do you mean there were 246 killings since 2008? There are more than that each year in most major cities, including the ones that already have strict gun control laws.
Come on fess up, you are just worried that Hadji is going to steal your SPOTY crown this year, aren't you? I was just talking with my good friend APU, Aka Curly, about the deep shame he carries having not just one, but two brown people so high on the list of front runners for SPOTY.
I would like to move on to more advanced discussions with you once you have mastered the basics.
BTW be honest with us, you read Money Magazine, don't you?
uote:
Nothing would have prevented Roof from buying or owning it, despite a pending drug charge, according to federal gun laws.
Contrary to some media reports, Roof’s pending drug charge was not a felony. The charge is a misdemeanor, according to a review of court records, including a copy of the warrant obtained by The Greenville News.
A spokeswoman with the State Law Enforcement Division said Roof’s criminal record incorrectly listed the pending charge as a felony due to a data entry error. The record has since been corrected to reflect it is a misdemeanor, she said.
March 2, was for possession of prescription drug Suboxone, which a police officer found when he questioned Roof for strange behavior at stores in the Columbiana Centre shopping mall near Columbia on Feb. 28, according to an incident report and arrest warrant.
The case is pending in a Lexington circuit court, records show.
If Roof had walked into a gun shop, a pending felony drug charge would have shown up on a mandatory federal background check and would have blocked the sale. A pending misdemeanor charge would not.
If he purchased the gun through a private transaction, no background check would have been required.
http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2015/06/19/gun-laws-dylann-roof/29016743/
By the way about flags look at the Mississippi state flag. ;
... a future psychopath was in possession of Suboxone, a drug which is known to block dopamine and serotonin reuptake in the brain.
Have you ever been around someone using this drug? The people I know who use this drug come off as borderline whack jobs, who are incapable of producing a reasonable thought.
If the shooter was using, or most likely abusing this substance, no wonder he went crazy. These are nine more deaths that can be contributed to the use of RX drugs.
That will never pass now, even though I suspect this guy would have carried anyway.