FL School Shooting

[transporter]

Oh, absolutely!! People die DAILY from car accidents due to improper driving - yet we don't ban cars. People die DAILY from improper medical procedures, but we don't ban doctors. The actual positives of gun ownership in the hands of responsible citizens FAR outweighs the tiny number of people who die in mass shootings each decade..

Oye...those are really stupid and tired comments...

It's no wonder we as a nation can't come to any agreements on this issue when so people like you equate auto accidents to intentional shootings...and who see any attempts to limit the potential for future mass shootings as a means to take all your guns.

 

[black dog]

Even on a subject where you possess a higher level of knowledge you STILL can't be the least bit honest or intelligent in your commentary.

Ok...this is 52 years













https://patch.com/maryland/silverspring/maryland-s-history-of-gun-control-b4e5ae00

All those laws are working well with the criminal element in Maryland.
Baltimore has hit 343 homicides in 2017, and a new record for killings per capita.

Why is it the city's with the most stringent gun laws have the highest murder rates?

 

[PsyOps]

To your first point about cars people are actually required to take a knowledge and driving test before they are allowed to operate a vehicle. Would you be against the same for a gun?

How do you feel about Rubio taking $3 million from the NRA and immidetialy saying now is not the time to talk about gun control?

I clearly stated before that there are many responsible gun owners out there and I know many of them.

If I was a gun owner I would say to myself what can I do to change this situation?

You could petition for stricter regulations on who gets a gun through some kind of testing mechanism like getting a drivers license. Would you be against that?

Some countries require sheriffs to check on the security of citizens stored guns. Would you be against that?

To your first point - so what! All of that training still doesn't result in good drivers. There are some really dangerous people out on our roads causing all sorts of death and destruction. Our highways are a mass killing field. This has nothing to do with my point... if the standard is - this is dangerous therefore we have to ban it, then let's start with cars since they kill far more every day than guns.

I have no desire for more regulation on guns. I'm for less. The gun is not the problem. I am not for forcing people to take a test in order to exercise a constitutional right. The weight leans towards the MASS MAJORITY who own and handle their firearms responsibly. There are an estimated 300 millions guns that exist in this country. 299,980,000 (number based on logic) don't even go off each day, let alone go off in a malicious manner. Those percentages of proper use of guns far exceeds that of automobiles.

I believe your intentions are good. But what you are unintentionally calling for is a weaker society. We are already in a severely weakened state from a military that could turn us into a dictatorship. So many of you worry about Trump becoming the next Hitler, yet what are you going to do about it if he was able to get our military to cooperate in making that happen? You aren't armed, at all. You're helpless to a tyrannical government. And you're proposing to make us all even weaker to defend our way of life. That's rather perplexing to me.

 

[PsyOps]

Oye...those are really stupid and tired comments...

It's no wonder we as a nation can't come to any agreements on this issue when so people like you equate auto accidents to intentional shootings...and who see any attempts to limit the potential for future mass shootings as a means to take all your guns.

God I tell myself to not waste my time with you, but I can't resist this one.

Auto accidents are not really "accidents"; they happen because someone drove recklessly or carelessly. If you are texting while driving, you are purposely putting other lives at risk. If you are eating while driving, same thing. People that are aggressive, speeding, weaving in and out of traffic, tailgating, brake checking, etc... are all doing things on purpose to put lives at risk. It is a fair analogy to say, if you're going to use the standard of how dangerous something is as a means to ban it, then let's start with cars.

It's a damn dangerous world. We're not safe in public places, on our highways, in the air, not even in our own homes. That's just a fact of life. And that's a fact of living in a free society - taking the risk of enjoying your freedoms that you could get harmed by someone abusing those freedoms. The old tired adage of 'I'd rather live free and less safe, than less free and more safe'. What the hell good is being safe, if we're not free? Part of that free-ness is for me to choose how I protect myself. I'm far more comfortable using an AR than a shotgun during a home intrusion.

Folks want to dictate what others need and don't need. You seem to enjoy coming in here and disparaging people. You're free to do so, and exercise that freedom abundantly. I'd never propose to shut you up. I personally think you make a complete fool of yourself; but have at it. I'd prefer you would take a much more respectful tone; but hey, we're free right?

 

[GURPS]

To your first point about cars people are actually required to take a knowledge and driving test before they are allowed to operate a vehicle. Would you be against the same for a gun?

You could petition for stricter regulations on who gets a gun through some kind of testing mechanism like getting a drivers license. Would you be against that?

that does nothing to stop someone from driving a Car Without a License aka doing something illegal with a car

Some countries require sheriffs to check on the security of citizens stored guns. Would you be against that?

why do law abiding citizens have to give up there rights, because Criminals cannot control themselves ....


Would you be ok with the Police stopping by to check if your car is locked and the keys secured so no one unauthorized can take your car

 

[GURPS]

... if the standard is - this is dangerous therefore we have to ban it, then let's start with cars since they kill far more every day than guns.

hammers, baseball bats etc ... more people are bludgeoned than are killed with AR-15's

 

[Gilligan]

Even on a subject where you possess a higher level of knowledge you STILL can't be the least bit honest or intelligent in your commentary.

Ok...this is 52 years

My access to firearms and the types I own has not changed in 50 years. Why are you so willfully ignorant??

 

[SamSpade]

How do you feel about Rubio taking $3 million from the NRA and immidetialy saying now is not the time to talk about gun control?

Why does that have anything to do with anything?
Except that you are trying to impugn his motives for saying it - which is idiotic. Rubio is fairly reasonable even on this topic.
Even the more liberal fact-checkers have agreed that there are no gun control laws that will PREVENT mass shootings.
Period.

It's clear enough that right after a tragedy is not a time to recklessly make policy and legal decisions.
That is precisely how bad decisions come about - on either side of the aisle.
He's right - it's not rocket science. You don't start discussion in the heat of passion on a subject.

You know why? Because when the passion dies down - even the more anti-gun progressives shut down.
There's no urgency, because they can't exploit public outcry over it. So they don't advance it.

 

[PsyOps]

hammers, baseball bats etc ... more people are bludgeoned than are killed with AR-15's

The onesy-twosy incidents don't matter. If 20 different shooters kill 20 different people in Chicago in a single day, that's not news. There's no emotional gain in this. But have one person shoot and kill 20 people... now there is some emotional currency we can cling on to. For what reason? Because they don't like free people having the power to own guns. Now mind you, many of these gun-grabbers that sit in power are protected every day by someone carrying a gun. Good for them. Bad for us.

 

[Kyle]

I already said your generation did not have in restricted access to semi automatic weapons.

Semi automatics are 100-year-old technology you dip ####.

 

[Gilligan]

Semi automatics are 100-year-old technology you dip ####.

Yep...at least 100 years old. My 1911, for example...

I owned my first semi-automatic rifle in 1968..a Remington...I was 10 years old.

 

[Kyle]

So you are saying that you prefer mass shootings to updating the constitution. To fit with our current society that the original sinners could not have foreseen.

I think you’re right we should update the constitution!

But instead of getting rid of the guns we get rid of you and all the ####wads like you.

Should make good fertilizer.

 

[GURPS]

...... agreed that there are no gun control laws that will PREVENT mass shootings. Period.

NOPE Sappy has change her tune, now we are supposed to give up our semi-auto firearms [period] {weekend shooting Blather}
and all other weapons should be subject to Shooting Range Storage or Random Police Inspection to ensure weapons are LOCKED UP

It's clear enough that right after a tragedy is not a time to recklessly make policy and legal decisions.

that's is the PERFECT Time for Progressive Gun Banners ..... while everyone [progressives] is over Guns

 

[Gilligan]

It's no wonder we as a nation can't come to any agreements on this issue

That is incorrect; as a nation we came to an agreement on this issue a very long time ago. Just because a few whiners like you and Sappy don't like it does not make any difference. ;-)

 

[GURPS]

Yep...at least 100 years old. My 1911, for example...

C-96 Broom Handle Mauser - 1896

 

[Gilligan]

C-96 Broom Handle Mauser - 1896

And the iconic M1918 BAR...100 years old this year Still on the top of my "must have but don't yet" list.

 

[SamSpade]

Yep...at least 100 years old. My 1911, for example...

I owned my first semi-automatic rifle in 1968..a Remington...I was 10 years old.

My grandfather fought in WW 1. Number one cause of battle death? Idiotically underestimating the ability of a couple machine guns.

 

[vraiblonde]

I find it simply astounding that progressives want cops and the military - whom they profess to mistrust - being the only ones who have guns.

 

[PsyOps]

I find it simply astounding that progressives want cops and the military - whom they profess to mistrust - being the only ones who have guns.

Well, if no one had guns, we wouldn't need cops or military.

 

[Hijinx]

Well, if no one had guns, we wouldn't need cops or military.

If your aunt had a dick she would be your Uncle.