Summations Only

You're full of shit.But I guess since you have to resort to arguing the person instead of the position then that just goes to show that I'm right on this one. I suppose I could thank you for that but I'm not gonna because you're being an asshole.

I know what it says in English. Ignoring half of the sentence is egregiously wrong, whether it's the Supreme Court doing it or not.

You seem to have lost the plot. My point is that the Supreme Court could make it harder for violently insane people to obtain guns - and for violently sane people to obtain guns and for clumsily incompetent people to obtain guns, and so on. The wording is right there in the sacred 2nd amendment but they choose to studiously ignore it.

Falling asleep at the wheel? Forum Guidelines I feel like a referee at a boxing match. OK Break it up....ding ding

I'm tired of the personal attacks.

I agree that they often get out of hand. One problem is that many of us know each other...through our writings at least--so well. Its like a family feud.I encourage everyone to argue the position and not the person, though we often cannot resist taking jabs at our opponents.

So 20-30% hugeness. That's consistent with my collection.I wonder how that amount compares to the amount of gun transfers that are happening in the dark.I'm not against background checks, but personally I'd rather hassle the people who are committing crimes than those who aren't.I guess "closing the loophole" would mean that every time I sell a gun I would have to go through an FFL? Essentially banning all private transfers, period? Yeah, that's federal. You can still be permitted to buy a machine gun if you pay a tax to the ATF and it was manufactured before 1986, iirc.I've shot a couple machine guns, one was a MAC-11 - what a hot mess. Ooh, straight to banning guns. Nice, thanks for being honest. We have that in Illinois and it's not working here. Maybe at a federal level it would have a bigger impact, but I dunno.Out of curiosity: How would you feel about a free speech license? Or a license for due process? What's the goal for that one?Could that goal be met with the penalties from criminal charges?

I am also telling the truth. I understand that you don't like folks pointing to your past posts. Too bad. I am citing your positions and the result is picture of you that you do not like. I am not going to apologize for that.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I did not miss any such thing. I addressed the exact points you made, ringo.The Supreme Court has to allow the legislature to pass the laws. They have explicitly stated that Congress can pass laws to limit violently insane people from obtaining guns and that they are not overturning any laws that may be on the books that target the mentally ill. I notice the subtle shifting of the goalposts from your original statement which claimed that the Supreme Court and the NRA had said that such laws impossible.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Anybody who reads the thread can see that I said no such thing.

Someone who read this thread will find this: So, yeah, you did say some "such thing"But it turns out, that a reading of the Supreme Court decisions reveals the exact opposite of what you said, "seems to be". Now that I have pointed that out, you are claiming that you meant something else. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

At 5171 posts, this thread has proved a useful forum with which to vent our opinions on guns, society, and each other. It is getting too out of hand, however. I am going to start a sequel and maybe we can all start afresh.

No, you're not. And you're breaking the rules. You haven't pointed to anything. You're just gossiping about irrelevant shit. You haven't cited shit. You're just talking about something I may or may not have said in the past. It's off topic and beside the point - i.e. completely useless. You're also wrong about the position I took.And I can't care less about the picture, liar. But why are you so interested in what I do or do not like? Why do you care about me personally? You don't know me nor what I think. That you're lying about me personally is pretty insulting though - although, it's sad and pathetic that you care about this at all.Also, you're retarded to think that I have to have the exact same position on every single thread. Hell, I like debates where I'm assigned a position.People can take a position in a debate that they are not emotionally involved in - well, not you, but people better than you can.Also, and you might want to sit down for this one: People's opinions can change.There are things I think these days that are different from things I've thought in the past. Whoopty-fucking-do! I'm not looking for an apology. I'm saying fuck you asshole.

I don't think this thread should be closed, it's a useful repository for the collection of gun death incidents. The longer it gets, the more compelling the argument.It should speak for itself.

This thread is a repository for a great deal of information and arguments about gun control and mass murders. One thread, one place to search. Closing this thread and opening a new one would require two places to search. The same logic applies to the The Trump Presidency thread. Trump will be president for four or eight years. One thread, one place to search for stuff.--Percy