White supremacist mows down mosque in NZ

[luthervol]

As long as humans exist there will be mechanisms that can kill more people than they save. So are you advocating the banning of humans?

That is on par with some of ND's ridiculous posts.
I'm for banning the over-the-counter purchase of chemical weapons and nuclear warheads but not butter knives and shovels.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Repeat it with me......worst and most juvenile argument ever.
NFL rules against offensive holding do not prevent all holding; but I can give you a 100% guarantee, if there weren't rules against it, it would happen far more frequently.

Incorrect Forrest. It is the exact proper summary of the situation regardless of your continual bloviating. Criminals don’t obey laws. Gun control laws only impact law abiding citizens and have ZERO impact on criminals.

 

[luthervol]

If it affects 1 law abiding citizen it affects to many.

That's as stupid as saying that if it saves one life, it's justified.

 

[NorthDallas40]

That's as stupid as saying that if it saves one life, it's justified.

Odd that you would label life saving as stupid. But you be you.

 

[luthervol]

Incorrect Forrest. It is the exact proper summary of the situation regardless of your continual bloviating. Criminals don’t obey laws. Gun control laws only impact law abiding citizens and have ZERO impact on criminals.

IGNORANT ARGUMENT.

Criminals do obey some laws. They don't obey the laws they break, by definition, but they very well me be breaking them less frequently because of the law.
Also, many avoid the activity because of the illegality.
It's the rules against holding in the NFL.
Or maybe you can better understand the foul limit in basketball.

 

[luthervol]

Odd that you would label life saving as stupid. But you be you.

Pathetic comeback.
Lowering the speed limit to 20 mph on all roads would save multiple lives but no one supports that. It's not because they devalue life, but because they can balance the trade off. Maybe you lack the ability.

 

[NorthDallas40]

IGNORANT ARGUMENT.

Criminals do obey some laws. They don't obey the laws they break, by definition, but they very well me be breaking them less frequently because of the law.
Also, many avoid the activity because of the illegality.
It's the rules against holding in the NFL.
Or maybe you can better understand the foul limit in basketball.

Ignorant reply. All of your examples hold the offender accountable for THEIR OWN OFFENSES. Gun control by its nature penalized law abiding citizens for doing nothing wrong!

YOU’RE LOGIC IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED FORREST!

 

[NorthDallas40]

Pathetic comeback.
Lowering the speed limit to 20 mph on all roads would save multiple lives but no one supports that. It's not because they devalue life, but because they can balance the trade off. Maybe you lack the ability.

Set it to whatever you want and penalize the offenders only.

Repeal of NFA1934 is the only logical course of action!

 

[hog88]

That is on par with some of ND's ridiculous posts.
I'm for banning the over-the-counter purchase of chemical weapons and nuclear warheads but not butter knives and shovels.

You can already purchase chemical weapons over the counter and as far a nuclear weapons, if you got the cash and know how you can have one. Next?

 

[luthervol]

You can already purchase chemical weapons over the counter and as far a nuclear weapons, if you got the cash and know how you can have one. Next?

No you can't and no you can't.

 

[hog88]

That's as stupid as saying that if it saves one life, it's justified.

Not surprising coming from die-hard fascist. Individual liberty and rights are low on the fascist concern continuum.

 

[NorthDallas40]

No you can't and no you can't.

I can’t buy fertilizer and diesel fuel now?

 

[hog88]

No you can't and no you can't.

Wanna bet?

 

[ClearwaterVol]

How many people do you think would be effected by that line? Why?

What do you believe that limiting people to 1 gun per year will accomplish? What about magazines? Bullets?

Why not just a $1,000.00 tax per bullet?


Or how about we shore up the background check issues?
Work on our mental health issues?
Work on a reporting system? People know these nut jobs and in many instances have reported them to local police or FBI. How about a national reporting system?

 

[luthervol]

I can’t buy fertilizer and diesel fuel now?

Sure you can. I never said you couldn't buy the components. Go to Walmart and ask for a gallon of mustard gas or sarin.

 

[luthervol]

Wanna bet?

sure

 

[Fun coupon VOL]

sure

Jesus, it is obvious you are wrong.

 

[luthervol]

Jesus, it is obvious you are wrong.

So you're saying I can go to Walmart and buy some mustard gas?

 

[Orangeslice13]

So what's your "opinion" on these statements:
"I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump. I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad.”.....
“Second Amendment people” (preventing the appointment of liberal judges)....
“You also had some very fine people on both sides,”...
suggested his supporters “knock the hell” out of hecklers....
“He doesn't have a birth certificate, or if he does, there's something on that certificate that is very bad for him. ..
" And I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.”

...“Maybe he feels comfortable there … There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” (It was Obama's first visit to a mosque during his presidency)....
“The children of Muslim American parents, they’re responsible for a growing number for whatever reason a growing number of terrorist attacks,”

... I could go on.....

Trump response to NZ---channeling his inner Marcus Aurelius: My warmest sympathy and best wishes goes out to the people of New Zealand after the horrible massacre in the Mosques"

We can play quote for quote if you like but my opinion of Trump is about the same as Obama.
Both are about useless when it comes to bridging any decide.
Trump is simply ssdd and the people who think he’s not are blinded by their political side.

 

[luthervol]

We can play quote for quote if you like but my opinion of Trump is about the same as Obama.
Both are about useless when it comes to bridging any decide.
Trump is simply ssdd and the people who think he’s not are blinded by their political side.

Anyone who claims that Trump is nothing more than ssdd is completely delusional.

 

[hndog609]

Sure you can. I never said you couldn't buy the components. Go to Walmart and ask for a gallon of mustard gas or sarin.

OK, you've gone down this misguided road often enough and you need to get reigned back into a discussion germane to gun rights as being argued in the real world by sane people.

Without going into too much detail (particularly since you'd likely ignore any such effort at your personal whim and make such an effort a waste of my time) there are "firearms" (guns) and there are "weapons". Obviously all firearms are weapons but a great many weapons are not firearms. These classifications matter very much in how they are regulated. To keep it simple legalese on the matter refers to guns in the regular civilian sense as "those in common use for lawful purposes". There is pretty much quite literally no way to use things like nukes, deadly gasses, etc "for lawful purposes". In fact "area weapons" of pretty much any type would fall under what has been legally described as "dangerous and unusual". Obviously this is really just the other side of the coin to the previously cited "common" and "for lawful purposes". Even still practically any "gun", including machine guns, is still actually legal, just set aside under a more regulated classification.

Upshot of this is bringing up sarin gas/nukes/whatever is a dead giveaway for people who don't have a clue what they're talking about.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Anyone who claims that Trump is nothing more than ssdd is completely delusional.

^^^part of the problem.
Draw an imaginary line and say this much **** is ok but no more, then lie to yourself about the definition of ****. If someone like you thinks I’m delusional then I’m on the right track.

Being that I create jobs and help drive the economy while you weigh it down

 

[luthervol]

OK, you've gone down this misguided road often enough and you need to get reigned back into a discussion germane to gun rights as being argued in the real world by sane people.

Without going into too much detail (particularly since you'd likely ignore any such effort at your personal whim and make such an effort a waste of my time) there are "firearms" (guns) and there are "weapons". Obviously all firearms are weapons but a great many weapons are not firearms. These classifications matter very much in how they are regulated. To keep it simple legalese on the matter refers to guns in the regular civilian sense as "those in common use for lawful purposes". There is pretty much quite literally no way to use things like nukes, deadly gasses, etc "for lawful purposes". In fact "area weapons" of pretty much any type would fall under what has been legally described as "dangerous and unusual". Obviously this is really just the other side of the coin to the previously cited "common" and "for lawful purposes". Even still practically any "gun", including machine guns, is still actually legal, just set aside under a more regulated classification.

Upshot of this is bringing up sarin gas/nukes/whatever is a dead giveaway for people who don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Anti-aircraft guns? Illegal or just heavily regulated?
I think the point is pretty obvious, some weapons are deemed to have destructive potential so far beyond any legitimate legal use that the weapon should be illegal, or heavily regulated.

 

[hndog609]

Anti-aircraft guns? Illegal or just heavily regulated?
I think the point is pretty obvious, some weapons are deemed to have destructive potential so far beyond any legitimate legal use that the weapon should be illegal, or heavily regulated.

And, as is painfully obvious to anyone putting in any effort whatsoever, those classifications are already in place. If you can't keep your crayons inside the coloring lines (discussing firearms people can/have commonly purchased for lawful purposes) you're wasting everybody's time. (or just straight up trolling, which is as likely as anything)

 

[luthervol]

And, as is painfully obvious to anyone putting in any effort whatsoever, those classifications are already in place. If you can't keep your crayons inside the coloring lines (discussing firearms people can/have commonly purchased for lawful purposes) you're wasting everybody's time. (or just straight up trolling, which is as likely as anything)

Those classifications may need to be tweaked, added to, or broadened. You can act as if everything has been decided and it is as it will continue to be, but then that would make you the one eating crayons.