So, the Republican terrorist in Louisiana...

[ms_ann_thrope]

How about grow a fucking spine you worthless fucking invert.



?? Come on....your dick is 2x the size of that fuckin' douche nozzles. Quote who you want because fuck that limey shit bird, nobody died and mad him god.



And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

After the amount of force required to completely disarm 320 million US citizens the country that remained would be...unrecognizable.

 

[BotanyBoy]

After the amount of force required to completely disarm 320 million US citizens the country that remained would be...unrecognizable.

And if you immediately know the candlelight is fire, then the meal was cooked a long time ago.....

What's that got to do with anything said??

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

And if you immediately know the candlelight is fire, then the meal was cooked a long time ago.....

What's that got to do with anything said??

And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

You implied complete gun control is necessary to be effective.
I implied that is not possible without destroying the National Fabric.

 

[BotanyBoy]

And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

You implied complete gun control is necessary to be effective.
I implied that is not possible without destroying the National Fabric.

I did no such thing, gun control = prohibition was your assumption. Likely to push the idea that there is only total lack of regulation and total prohibition as the only options available. What a load of bullshit...

You can have a regulated armed population.....it has been done with great success and considering how things are in America there is without a doubt a LARGE amount of room for improvement in out laws/enforcement of the heat packin' public.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

I did no such thing...that was your assumption. Likely to push the idea that there is only total lack of regulation and total prohibition as the only options available. What a load of bullshit...

You can have a regulated armed population.....it has been done with great success and considering how things are in America there is without a doubt a LARGE amount of room for improvement in out laws/enforcement of the heat packin' public.

And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

Then what does this mean?

 

[BotanyBoy]

And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

Then what does this mean?

Exactly what it says.....

How else would you describe most of the gun control laws in America?

Banning bayonet lugs on a couple models of rifle does nothing to address a handgun issue. It's incomplete, half assed, ineffective gun control.

You just seem to think gun control = gun prohibition..... well you're wrong.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Exactly what it says.....

How else would you describe most of the gun control laws in America?

What would make them effective?

 

[BotanyBoy]

What would make them effective?

Addressing the actual problem for one.....

Some tools for LEO's to use in enforcement would probably help too.

 

[Sean Renaud]

-snip-​

And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

PRetty much. More accurately that we both need federal laws fuck state rights and we need to go after hand guns if this is a goal.

After the amount of force required to completely disarm 320 million US citizens the country that remained would be...unrecognizable.

First, it's not at all necessary to disarm 320 million US citizens. Statitics show that the number of gun owners has been declining for decades anyway. The stats may say 88.8 guns per 100 people and that's true. The in reality it's 20 guys with four guns a piece . For what that's worth.

Second if the goal was complete and utter disarming you don't need to actually disarm them. Just make the penalty for being caught with one so high that nobody would dare use one. A gun that stays at home in your safe isn't a gun, it's a weight. The over all effect is the same. And that's assuming that was the goal.

And that retarded as fuck incomplete half assed gun control is ineffective.

You implied complete gun control is necessary to be effective.
I implied that is not possible without destroying the National Fabric.

What would make them effective?

No, that is not the goal. You really are bad at English aren't you. Incomplete in this case is akin to unfinished. It's simply done incorrectly.

 

[BotanyBoy]

PRetty much. More accurately that we both need federal laws fuck state rights and we need to go after hand guns if this is a goal.
.

Seriously.....idk what the problem is from the RW....they hate states rights anyhow.

Incomplete in this case is akin to unfinished.

Nuh HUHHHHAAA!!! Means gubbmint is cummin fer mah GUNZ n' BYEBuHL!! HURRRRR cuz das whut bubba towld me 'gun contowl' meanz!!

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Addressing the actual problem for one.....

Some tools for LEO's to use in enforcement would probably help too.

??????????
That's supposed to be some kind of answer?
Eliminating all the people would make the problem disappear. That's about your only viable solution short of a complete military disarmament.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

PRetty much. More accurately that we both need federal laws fuck state rights and we need to go after hand guns if this is a goal.

So, fuck the constitution.

First, it's not at all necessary to disarm 320 million US citizens. Statitics show that the number of gun owners has been declining for decades anyway. The stats may say 88.8 guns per 100 people and that's true. The in reality it's 20 guys with four guns a piece . For what that's worth.

That's not at all accurate. Gun sales are thru the roof.

Second if the goal was complete and utter disarming you don't need to actually disarm them. Just make the penalty for being caught with one so high that nobody would dare use one. A gun that stays at home in your safe isn't a gun, it's a weight. The over all effect is the same. And that's assuming that was the goal.

More laws?





No, that is not the goal. You really are bad at English aren't you. Incomplete in this case is akin to unfinished. It's simply done incorrectly.

see above

 

[BotanyBoy]

??????????
That's supposed to be some kind of answer?

It's the only sane answer.

Eliminating all the people would make the problem disappear. That's about your only viable solution short of a complete military disarmament.

No one is trying to make the problem go away, we would just like to reduce it.

You're just making this a traumatic nation destroying event or nothing proposition because you're a hack incapable of thinking outside the standard RW "It's all or nothing, black and white, on or off, freedumb or tyranny, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION!!" rhetoric because you either have a financial interest in the gun industry....or you're a fucking moron.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

It's the only sane answer.



No one is trying to make the problem go away, we would just like to reduce it.

You're just making this a traumatic nation destroying event or nothing proposition because you're a hack incapable of thinking outside the standard RW "It's all or nothing, black and white, on or off, freedumb or tyranny, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION!!" rhetoric because you either have a financial interest in the gun industry....or you're a fucking moron.

Reduce it. What's an acceptable body count?

 

[BotanyBoy]

see above

What's wrong with shit canning 10A? Republicans fucking hate that one anyhow....

Gun sales are up, but not the number of people who own them. Like he said, it's not 80 gun owners it's 8 guys with 10 guns each.

Yes, more laws, the last ones didn't work time to try again. That's how shit works.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Reduce it. What's an acceptable body count?

Yes....reduce it.

Anything less than we have now would be better.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

What's wrong with shit canning 10A? Republicans fucking hate that one anyhow....

Gun sales are up, but not the number of people who own them. Like he said, it's not 80 gun owners it's 8 guys with 10 guns each.

Yes, more laws, the last ones didn't work time to try again. That's how shit works.

Stats are only based on legal gun sales. No one has any idea what the actual numbers are.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Yes....reduce it.

Anything less than we have now would be better.

That moronic, sorry.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Stats are only based on legal gun sales. No one has any idea what the actual numbers are.

Live in denial all you want.

But sales are up while number of armed homes is down....that means fewer nuts buying moar gunz.

That moronic, sorry.

*That's*

LOL

And no, trying to improve the situation by writing better laws to deal with societies problems is not moronic, that's called progress and the reason we don't live in caves anymore.

 

[phrodeau]

Stats are only based on legal gun sales. No one has any idea what the actual numbers are.

Gun manufacturers know.

There aren't too many homemade guns on the market.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Gun manufacturers know.

There aren't too many homemade guns on the market.

My dads guns were from the 30's. They still work fine. How many guns are creeping across the border? How many are being smuggled in from Europe?

Gun manufacturers wouldn't know that.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yes, fuck the Constitution. IF you're only argument is the Constitution says then you don't have an argument. What you've got is a piece of paper and the confidence that most people are too cowardly to tell you it was written by men not gods.

You can claim that it's not accurate but multiple polls all show the same information. That while gun sales are through the roof (which isn't even really true but lets ignore that) the number of households with firearms are steadily declining. Turns out that people primarily kept guns to hunt and as fewer and fewer people hunt for food or even sport that the number of families with guns has likewise declined.

Yes more laws. We could probably do away with some of the old ones that aren't effective but since that doesn't happen in the real world, yes more laws. There is nothing at all wrong with more laws.

See above? So yes, more laws.

Stats are only based on legal gun sales. No one has any idea what the actual numbers are.

We can make educated guesses however. Legal gun owners have little reason to lie on surveys about is there a gun in the house. Sure some of them are paranoid bitches who think Obama's going to take their guns but most aren't quite that stupid. Now just like anything it's impossible to be 100% accurate, that's not even a goal.

As for what number of deaths are acceptable that's for society to decide. IF we think our current numbers are acceptable then we need to stop bitching. I don't want to hear about Abu shot up a military recruitment center, Mark shot up a school, Chow shot up a restaurant or Sitting Bull shot a sitting Senator in the face. Shit happens. IF it's not an acceptable number we start looking for solutions and the obvious step here is more laws to begin with.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Live in denial all you want.

But sales are up while number of armed homes is down....that means fewer nuts buying moar gunz.


-************
*That's*

LOL

see below

And no, trying to improve the situation by writing better laws to deal with societies problems is not moronic, that's called progress and the reason we don't live in caves anymore.

Better laws? What's more draconian than the death penalty?

 

[BotanyBoy]

My dads guns were from the 30's. They still work fine.

Clear proof that new gun sales = new gun owners.....

 

[BotanyBoy]

Better laws? What's more draconian than the death penalty?

Yea....

Illegal possession of a firearm is a capital offence nationwide now hua? Care to point out when that happened?

Or clue the rest of the class in on what random heap of unrelated bullshit your mind came up with to try and dodge the point that better laws can result in profoundly positive change when properly enforced??