“Retarded”? I know you’re more articulate than that - go cry more about your job in the Lounge or something.
Great comeback, sir. I look forward to seeing you try to defend your want of a gun in the face of mass shootings.
I stopped watching when he compared normal murder rates to gun ownership around the world.
Those are some strawman examples always brought up in these situations that are nothing like what we’re facing from gun violence.
Banning guns is dumb, but they do need to be more heavily regulated in a manner that makes it easier to both keep track of them and their owners. All these guys crying about their gun rights and how they aren’t criminals when most of them are the ones that sell the fucking guns to said criminals…
But it’s legal wah! Guns should be heavily monitored. The ones who cry about privacy give no fucks about the NSA up their asses.
Nothing like were facing huh? Wow, I didnt realize gun violence was on epidemic levels. I apologize, i was wrong. Its just odd since gun homicides have been steadily declining since 1993. Can you shine some light on this? Holy fuck ive been wrong. HALP!!!
Anyways, vehicle related accidents and homicide still outnumber gun related accidents and homicide by a wide margin. Even removing the accident statistics doesnt help. FUCK, its nothing like were facing.
Would you like some numbers?
PS - Pls say yes. =)
The Congressman Who Restricted Gun Violence Research Has Regrets:
Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jay-dickey-gun-violence-research-amendment_561333d7e4b022a4ce5f45bf
Based on what? Last I checked the people who want guns to stay legal are the ones worried about crap like the NSA.
That statement is the exact opposite of my experience with the progun crowd.
You and I have had different experiences. Anecdotally, I’ve seen many people who are pro gun nuts say “well, if you’re not breaking the law what do you care?” It’s always been a funny juxtaposition to me, but alas.
Anecdotes are subjective, so they aren’t valid data.
/bias of my own
backtrack to what?
your rebuttel to the idea of state sponsored monopolies boiled down to
“you are dumb because that’s a conspiracy theory.”
That’s not a rebuttal. You circumvented the entire idea because of one group’s viewpoint, which is typical of people like you. Not only that, you did it again.
You ignored any semblance of argument and disregarded the notion as some, dumb notion of conspiracy, when in fact, there being a monopoly has an actual affect on people’s lives.
Barring the state from owning the monopoly isn’t just about fighting a supposed “tyranny”, it’s about having the freedom to choose. Do you want to defend yourself and your family? A choice based on the idea on whether or not you want to depend on government agency to protect you from whatever may come your way, or you will take charge. Police don’t do anything after the fact, that’s a fact.
In your response to me, you also ignored the statistics that Shaft Agent had posted. Which I don’t find odd at all. People like you who are against the idea of freedom of choice regarding these things have statistically ignored the facts when they don’t favor your argument.
The facts are, firearms in America protect more families than they hurt. The facts are, this is a matter of choice, and as a society built on the idea of choice, it’s a consequence we must deal with when it happens. The facts are, we are a nation built on the idea of barring the state from owning monopolies on fundamental human natures.
We bar the state from owning a monopoly on speech
We bar the state from owning a monopoly on law
We bar the state from owning a monopoly on violence
This is no different than the other.
And even if we disregard the monopoly idea or every single argument for firearms, as a citizen of the United States that does his civic duty and fulfills his unwritten contract with the state; I have every right to own as many firearms as I want. It’s my constitutional right regardless of what you may think, or the consequences may be. That alone fundamentally voids any argument you may have regarding the abolition of my rights, and of others, to own a weapons. It’s absurd to revoke my rights as a citizen, or any other, as we fulfill the implicit duties we owe as a citizens because some other moron decided to break his contract. As a society where the foundations are built on the idea of freedom of choice and the barring of state sponsored monopolies. We have an obligation to continue upholding those ideas and understand that these consequences, unintended, are the consequences due to what we value.
We can’t have our cake and eat it. WE can’t have a “safe” society when we choose to bar monopolies.
The only thing ridiculous here is your argument. It’s the same type of argument that argues for the regulation and restriction of speech on the grounds that it’s hateful and must protect people. Or the argument that monopolizes law in a way that allows the government to go about doing things it shouldn’t be doing on the grounds that it needs to protect it’s citizens.
IDK, people who say they aren’t afraid of government looking into them back in 03 to present where the same republican types that where for “gun rights”. There has been a departure from that in recent times, but I’d have to agree with Raz0r, that the people who cry the most about gun rights are the ones who didn’t give a shit about the Patriot Act or NSA in general.
As much as I want people to have better mental health, I think its silly to assume that the people willing to use legally acquired guns to commit crimes are going to seek medical help. Not necessarily dealing with the thread but a couple of friends posted a shitty article mentioning that.
Ed Lover.gif
Maybe the people who have the “if a republican did it, it must be good” mentality, but there were quite a few people on the right who were absolutely mad about the patriot act and saw it as a violation of liberties.
It’s ridiculous to think anyone who commits a crime is mentally ill. What if they just wanted to shoot shit and make it die? Burying everything under the guise of mental illness attempts to hide the problem of mass shootings we’re facing in our society. I don’t think many of the people who have committed these acts are mentally ill. I just think they’re stupendous assholes who want attention.
And going at Pedoviejo here, we as a society can decide you cannot have a gun. The US fancies itself as a state of choices, but it clearly isn’t the libertine society you’d like it to be. We all decide whether or not what you can do is allowed. Not only that, but we change our minds about it a lot. It’s why slavery was abolished, why alcohol was banned and later unbanned, how corporations got the same power as people, how companies’ loyalty now lie with shareholders instead of CEOs and the public, et al. So if we, as a society, decide your right to guns is null and void, guess what? If you want to keep living in this country you’re going to have to give them up.
As an aside, I find it funny how so many people claim guns are a God-given right when guns were invented like 18,000 years after the Bible was originally written. Dat foresight, I guess.
There was another shooting just around 21st street, 1 person died while 2 got hurt… but i guess this aint a good argument eh?
I mean if we post every isolated incident.
http://www.london24.com/news/crime/man_in_his_40s_stabbed_in_romford_1_4265156
http://www.london24.com/news/crime/innocent_man_stabbed_ten_times_in_ealing_1_4261370
You only need to camp the “crime” section in any major news outlet for a given country. That’s why we care more about overall trends.
Eh, shes pretty stupid. She said gun registration assumed she was a criminal. Thats dumb. When i went to the dmv in las vegas to get my new license, and had to have my birth certificate, previous license, and 3 pieces of mail that prove i live there, then had them put a fucking hole in my old license, which made it useless, and had to wait like 7 days to get my fucking license, i didnt think las vegas was treating me like a criminal.
Point being, we register a lot of things, and have to go through a pretty extensive process doing it. Why all of a sudden when it comes to guns, the idea of gun registry is absurd. Its right wing hick logic, mixed with high levels of paranoia at best.
**As for what she said about mass shootings being down, thats not true. Mass shootings are either steady, or on an increase since 82 depending on where you get your info from, and how they gathered it. The mass shootings going up article is usually coming from the mother jones article, but the data it uses is a little different than the data that James Allan Fox uses, which includes all mass shootings including 4 or more victims, with nothing discerning the type of shooting. The mother jones article focuses less on gang related shootings, armed robbery, etc…, and more on spree killings like virginia tech, columbine, etc… Which is understandable, but dishonest, because are 4 innocent people killed in an armed robbery not as important as 4 innocent people killed in a mcdonalds by a disgruntled employee. If anything the mother jones article should say that spree killings in their research is up, not just mass shootings. **
So i dont know if people watched that video or not, but first she comes off as a paranoid nut, making an illogical argument against gun registry. Then she proceeds to say that mass shootings are down, which at the very least is dishonest. Michael moore didnt do much to counter that argument, other than laugh at her, but i dont expect much from him.