oh, thats right, grenades are outlawed....
never mind
NRA sextoys....
-- Modified on 1/14/2008 12:44:46 PM
Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Who makes Guns? People do.
The solution to this quandary is simple: Kill the people who make the guns that are used to kill people.
Ideally, using the guns they themselves manufactured.
Are you giving the opening salvo in the 2008 psudo-lib campaign against basic human rights or did you just wake up after falling off your bar stool and knocking yourself out on the hard floor?
kill people, poisons kill people, drunk drivers kill people with their cars, bludgening someone with a victotian candle-stick holder kills people, Drowning in water kills people, pouring gasoline on a victom and igniting it ki
ls people, etc, etc...
Are you starting to realize how stupid you sound??(I expect not, but the rest of us do...)
Given enough time, determination and skill, virtually ANY tool or oject could be used "kill people" if the intent to murder is in the heart of the PERSON doing the killing...
A "gun" is merely a "tool" that launches a projectile in a specific direction using a source of pressurized gas; rapidly expansive out-gassing from exploding gun-powder, pressurized air or CO2, mechanical spring-tension, etc...)
"People kill people" is the absolute-truth of the matter, a gun is merely one weapon-of-choice...
A Gun in one of those convenience items consumers must have.
an equality that pseudo-libs find abhorent. They enable an old man or a young woman to defend against a thug or a tyrant. They are the final line of defense against despots and dictators. They are also the source of much recreation, hunting and target competetion. "A man without a gun is a subject, a man with a gun is a citizen."
The slogan about guns not killing people is just misleading. One would talk about a knife that cuts meat, a hammer that drives nails, a car that drives 80 mph. Why is it politically correct to talk of those tools doing their functions while only with guns, they don't shoot anything. It's the only tool humans ever made that doesn't do nothin'. Why? It isn't PC, to Republican Conservative gun nuts, as you've shown taking offense at a perfectly factual statement.
I don't mind the right to keep and bear arms, but I do mind the bullshit that passes back and forth between the sides. Even straight-shooters don't shoot straight about guns.
but I've got to agree with Zin on this one. Of course guns kill people, that and killing animals is what they were designed for.
"Guns don't kill people" makes about as much sense as "war on drugs" or "just say no". It's pure jingoism. I am a firm believer in the 2nd Ammendment and a NRA member, but yes, guns do kill people, and some of those people definitely need killing.
I do understand why the "gun nuts" are so adamant in their rhetoric however, the anti gunners are not interested in "common sense" gun legislation, they're stated goal is to ban firearms completely. Is is any wonder that the Pro 2nd ammendment forces are so unwilling to give an inch when it comes to the rights of law abiding gun owners?
I support the 2nd Amendment.
I also support gun registration.
I do not support unrestricted ownership of guns, nor do I support unrestricted manufacture and sales of unregistered firearms and other weaponry.
Let's face facts. The numbers dont lie.
In 1996, there were almost 1.8 guns for every man woman and child in the US and 9,390 people were killed by guns in that year. By 2004, those figures were up to 3.1 guns per person, with 30,000 dead.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. I believe the line must be drawn near the top, i.e. the manufacturers need to be held accountable for their weaponry. Black market, smuggling, gun running, that's where we need to address focus; not the homeowner seeking to protect his family, the hunter in tune with nature, the collector.
-- Modified on 1/14/2008 3:48:14 PM
makes no more sense than controlling drugs from the source. I'll use your numbers of 3.1 guns per person which is almost one Billion firearms. Controlling that many firearms is an effort in futilty, it just can't be done. The only firearms that will be controlled are the ones that are already in law abiding hands.
The only ones that benefit in that scenario are the criminals who face a lessor likelyhood of armed resistance, and the politicians who sponsor this type of feel good legislation.
ok fair enough, the comparison is valid.
so what if any solution do we have? feel good legislation is pathetic, i agree.
unbridled adherence to an out of control proliferation of firearms is also unacceptable.
so what else do we have?
or is it simply too far gone?
give people who handle weapons an economic incentive to avoid the misuse of firearms, and keep others from misusing them.
What could be simpler than insurance? Just like worker's comp, any person who sells a weapon or ammo pays for a bond that covers any damages that might be unlawfully inflicted with that weapon. You handle a lot of the weapons that get into the wrong hands, your rates go up, you might even go out of business.
It may not be a lot, because most weapons aren't misused. And paying off victims is not nearly as important as making the distributors think about who they are selling to.
Weapons don't bother me, I've been around them all my life. The operators are the big issue, and whenever somebody says "guns don't kill people" you can bet you are talking to somebody far too stupid to be trusted with one.
now that you mention it, it might not be a bad idea to carry a worker's comp type policy with most hazardous conditions.
Do you know how worker's comp came about? It was to limit & manage employer liability for on the job accidents, around the turn of the last century.
Really not a bad idea.
But you fuckers who think you know all about weapons because you go duck hunting are almost as bad as the idiots who are scared of them because they make loud noises. You need to deal with the ducks shooting back.
instituted gun registration, saying Germany was the first country to enact it and that other civilized countries would follow their lead to a safer world. No legitimate purpose is achieveable with gun registration even though good old Adolph put his system to "good" use in confiscating the guns of Jews and other People who soon fell victim to his ways. Gun registration is nothing other than a compilation of the names and addresses of people who are a threat to tyrants.
A rational response, and most supporting gun regulation agree that they shouldn't be banned outright, but does one really need a semi-automatic to knock-off Bambi?
any I don't need the damn'd pseudo-libs and the tyrants they worship telling me what kind of gun I need or want. The Second Amendment wasn't based upon hunting, it serves to curtail tyrants and other pseudo-libs. Beat your meat with a rock and pick any type of rock you want.
Does one "really" need a 300+ horsepower engine in their 2 seat sports coup, Especially when there are so few roads in the United States with a speed limit that exceeds 65 MPH?
I can just hear the cries of righteous indignation from countless gun control advocates who feel it is their god given right to own & drive the biggest or fastest or most powerful car their wallets can afford, yet their only justification for their motoring excess is a common class C Drivers License which is considered merely a "privilege" in every court in the land.
A 6000 pound SUV or a 160+ MPH performance car can create as much or more bedlam and bloodshed in the wrong hands as any semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round clip. The rifle although carrying a Constitutional "Right" to own requires a Department of Justice criminal/psychological background check of the purchaser in most every State of the Union. The 6000 pound/300+ horsepower rolling penis requires only a simplistic written and rudimentary practical test administered by a low level government functionary along with the price of admission.
A licensed motorist with multiple violations of the vehicle & traffic codes as well as chargeable accidents 'may' have his driver's license come up for a 'DMV review'.
In some States an otherwise responsible, law abiding gun owner can have his gun confiscated and be held criminally if he accidentally fails to remove all the bullets from his weapon and store them separate from the gun, in a locked container while transporting his gun to the local pistol/rifle range.
It seems there is far more “rights” given to the “privilege” of driving than to the Constitutional, Second Amendment “Right” to keep and bear arms.
I kinda doubt you are gonna be very equal with your bird gun or .357 against my M240G.
If you think that your gun is gonna protect your couch potato ass against Matt Damon, you got another think coming. No weapon is any better than its operator.
Just sayin'
As long as I use mine first, I'll be more than equal. lol
Point taken though about "No weapon is any better than its operator". If you own a firearm, you owe it to yourself and others around you to be proficient with it. Otherwise you're liable to shoot your own foot off, or have it stuffed up your ass.
you can empty your .357 magazine at me from 200 yards. Then I'll take a single shot with an M-16 and drop you.
Equalizing is BS. It has always depended on all sorts of variables. Changes in technology only changes the critical issues.
The NRA argument is that any moron with a gun is equal, and not a danger unless you are a criminal or tyrant. Or happen to be downrange when Opie the inbred spastic lets one go. Obviously, that's more of an issue in cities than in the country.
The NRA has never made your ridiculous argument that any moron with a gun is equal, and the NRA is a huge proponent of guntraining and gun safety.Jacko, I wish you actually were an idiot and not just an asshole pretending to be an idiot.
"you can empty your .357 magazine at me from 200 yards. Then I'll take a single shot with an M-16 and drop you."
This might be true with my 357, but give me six shots at you from two hundred yards with my 44 mag Super Ruger with the twelve inch barrel, and I guarantee you, I'll drop you with one of them. It's still a stupid argument, and I don't know why I even bothered to respond.
and you know you wouldn't get 6 shots, because anybody carrying around a pistol with a 12" barrel is a fucking joker.
You know what would happen is that the rifleman would squeeze off a burst and the pistolman would scurry. End of firefight.
The NRA has always been all talk, and that's fine. While they're busy rubbing out their guns, they're losing jobs to Mexicans.
If you can't compete with a Mexican, you got a problem better solved with Ritalin than fucking firepower.
Well, Corporal Klink, if you want my gun come and get it. You may get a lesson in equality.
all I have to do is sell you the shit that will be your downfall, and that is likely to be some entertaining ideology.
Reflexes. Surprise. Be fast on the draw-- that has to be the theme of most westerns. The white hat might have defeated the black hat. But after the black hat killed about three people.
It does reflect on real life. A guy who has his gun pointing first wins. If the criminal has the drop on you, he wins. It's pretty random.
I am incredibly amused by the assertion that we need access to assault weapons to "protect us from the government". Now, remember Saddam Hussein in Iraq? He made sure all his people had access to AK47s, well before the American invasion.
These well-armed citizens were integral to the defense of their rights against the Tyrant Saddam!!!!
Oh, wait a second, he gave them the guns. They did nothing. Nothing, that is, until the US came in a toppled Saddam. Then the guns (and RPGs, car-bombs, IEDs, etc.) all came out to play.
What can we learn from this?
keep your pseudo-lib, limp wristed hands, off my guns. Leave me alone and I will leave you alone. Simple solution to your problem.
and then they cry when the sheriff shoots back, the big meanie.
If the Feds really wanted harry's guns, they'd send a nice package straight to his trailer, battery 3 rounds, fuze quick, and let the buzzards pick out what they wanted.
But I think they figure it's a kind of population control. If the harrys of the world shoot anybody, it's most likely their cousin anyway, and if they don't, then no harm, no foul. They just wave 'em around for entertainment, the fuckin idjuts.
I do like that dune buggy, though. Fucking 6 rounds flechette trims all the hedges for a quarter mile, no shit.
oh, thats right, grenades are outlawed....
never mind
NRA sextoys....
-- Modified on 1/14/2008 12:44:46 PM
I'm better off thinking up a bunch of new aliases.