Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control III
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 543 of 1184 (842411)
10-31-2018 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 539 by ICANT
10-30-2018 7:02 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
It is a fact, not bias, that firearms are extremely dangerous and deadly.
Firearms are extremely deadly in the hands of trained people.
Given the 38,000+ people killed by firearms each year, they're extremely deadly in anyone's hands.
No firearm by itself is extremely dangerous. If you can find me an example where a firearm got the shells out of the box inserted them in the magazine loaded one in the chamber and discharged killing someone or wounding someone I will agree with you that firearms are extremely dangerous.
What is wrong with you? Why do you keep rebutting something I've never said and that I've repeatedly reminded you I've never said? No one, including me, denies that a firearm sitting by itself is not going to harm anyone. To clarify, we can draw these equivalences:
  • "Firearms by themselves" = not dangerous
  • "Unarmed people" = not usually very dangerous
  • "People + firearms" = very dangerous
This is why people and firearms shouldn't mix.
Until then I will believe that the person holding a firearm is responsible for what the firearm does, not the firearm.
I have said the exact same thing. Again, a person with a firearm is very dangerous, which is why people shouldn't have firearms. There was a point in time not very many messages ago where you seemed to understand that I want to take people's guns away. I've never made any ridiculous statements about guns shooting people by themselves. I think your memory is failing you. Perhaps you should reread the thread.
The same thing goes for automobiles. It is the driver that is responsible for what the automobile does.
Yes, of course, we agree. But both motor vehicles and licenses to operate them are tightly regulated. Guns and gun licenses should be, too. Random inspections of homes to insure safe storage and proper maintenance should be part of it.
Percy writes:
You've made this argument before. The answer hasn't changed. Transportation is essential to any economy. Guns are not.
My guns are just as essential to my peace of mind and to my ability to protect my family and myself and friends. As cars are to the survival of the human race.
Your peace of mind is grounded in a delusion that your guns make you safer. And neither guns nor cars are essential to the survival of the human race - you're getting absurd again. You seem to ping-pong between "wrong", "crazy", "silly", "irrelevant" and "absurd".
Mankind got by without automobiles for over at least 5,000 years.
More like a couple hundred thousand years.
But mankind would not be here if he had not had weapons to defend his family and himself and provide food for the table. They didn't have the supermarket to run to and get food, like you do.
There are undoubtedly times and places where weapons are necessary. The modern United States is not one of them.
Percy writes:
True. Would that guns were regulated as tightly as motor vehicles.
Weapons have been around a lot longer than cars have.
Is there a coherent argument in there somewhere?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 539 by ICANT, posted 10-30-2018 7:02 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(4)
Message 551 of 1184 (842553)
11-02-2018 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 545 by ICANT
11-02-2018 12:33 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
So many of your replies seem to run along the lines of, "I have no coherent answer, so I shall string together a bunch of non sequiturs," and this reply is just more of the same.
ICANT writes:
Straggler writes:
So - I ask again - What would be the problem with guns being equally well regulated?
Seat belts, do not stop automobiles from having wrecks.
Is there anyone, not just in this thread but anywhere in the world, who has claimed that seat belts prevent motor vehicle accidents? No, of course not. Then why are you saying such a silly thing?
Seat belts help reduce the likelihood and severity of injury in the event of an accident. I can't think of anything equivalent that you could do to a gun, but a bullet-resistant vest would be something like the equivalent of a seat belt in a gun context.
speed limits, even when obeyed do not stop automobiles from having wrecks.
This isn't as bad as your previous response, but it's pretty close. Speed limits help reduce the likelihood and severity of motor vehicle accidents. The equivalent for a gun might be to reduce the firing rate.
insurance requirements, don't stop automobiles from having wrecks whether a person is covered or not.
This one's just as ludicrous as the first. Of course insurance doesn't prevent motor vehicle accidents. What idiot would think they would?
The gun equivalent would be requiring gun insurance in the event your gun causes property or personal injury or death, in the same way that insurance is required for motor vehicles.
licensing, Putting a tag on the vehicle don't stop automobiles from having wrecks.
This is about as bad as the second one. Motor vehicle licensing helps minimize the frequency with which motor vehicles are operated by people who have not fulfilled the requisite criteria, such as receiving training, passing a driving test and an eyesight test, recording whether they need vision correction to drive, etc. A gun license would do pretty much the same.
registration, being on record don't stop automobiles from having wrecks.
This one is pretty bad, too. A fully registered vehicle means it has clear ownership, that it has been inspected and is safe to drive, and that its pollution control devices are working. A registered gun would mean it has clear ownership, that it has been inspected and is safe to fire, that no registration information has been filed off or obscured, that its rifling pattern is recorded, and that it has not had any illegal modifications performed.
You purchase a gun from a licensed dealer and it will be registered today.
Registration isn't required in most states. For guns purchased from gun dealers it depends upon the state, and for guns purchased privately or at gun shows usually no registration is required at all. There are no federal laws regarding registration, and there is no national gun registry. Here's a list, this is taken from the Wikipedia article on gun laws in the United States:
StateRegistration Required
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
ConnecticutX (in-state purchases only)
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
HawaiiX (with some exceptions)
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
MarylandX (not long guns)
MassachusettsX (with many exceptions)
MichiganX (not long guns)
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New JerseyX (not long guns)
New Mexico
New YorkX (not long guns)
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
PennsylvaniaX (not long guns, partial for handguns)
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
WashingtonX (not long guns, partial for handguns)
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
As you can see, few states require registration of any kind.
Nothing stops someone from taking a registered gun and killing someone with it.
Of course not, and that's stupid - registration, no matter for what, doesn't prevent misuse. But if rifling were recorded at the time of registration, and if there were a national registry, then many otherwise unsolved murders could be solved. And knowing all bullets could be traced back to the gun that fired them, and that guns can be traced back to their owners, could act as a discouragement to murder.
A license is required to carry a concealed weapon. But nothing keeps a person without a license from concealing a weapon on his/her person and then using it to kill someone.
You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty understanding simple things, like the purpose of licensing and registration. It isn't prevention.
As you can see government rules and regulations don't stop automobile wrecks from happening and gun laws don't stop guns from being used to kill people.
This is as meaningless as all the other ways you said it.
Both require an operator for them to be operated.
Well, duh.
Fix the humans and you will fix the problem.
Take the guns away and it will fix the problem.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 545 by ICANT, posted 11-02-2018 12:33 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 571 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 9:54 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 552 of 1184 (842557)
11-02-2018 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 546 by ICANT
11-02-2018 1:09 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
I don't even own an AR15 I classify them as toys.
You just never give up saying incredibly stupid things. These toys, as you call them (including similar weapons like the Bushmaster), have been used to carry out a number of mass murders. Here's a list going back as far as the Sandy Hook Elementary School and Aurora shootings:
IncidentYearKilledInjured
Pittsburgh Synagogue2018117
Stoneman Douglas High School20181717
Las Vegas201759422
Sutherland Springs Church20172720
Orlando Nightclub20165053
San Bernardino20151624
Umpqua Community College2015108
Washington Navy Yard2013138
Sandy Hook Elementary2012282
Aurora20121270
AR-15's and similar weapons are not toys. That you call them toys says that you are cold, insensitive and irrational, and that you place a lower value on human life than on making sure these murderously dangerous weapons that you consider toys remain in wide circulation - but then we knew that already.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 546 by ICANT, posted 11-02-2018 1:09 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 572 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 10:24 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 557 of 1184 (842585)
11-03-2018 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 553 by jar
11-02-2018 8:20 PM


Re: Another snub nosed day.
Matthew 26:52 Put your sword back in its place, Jesus said to him, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 553 by jar, posted 11-02-2018 8:20 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 559 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 9:21 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 558 of 1184 (842586)
11-03-2018 8:53 AM


Another Shooting
Three left dead after yoga studio shooting in Tallahassee, Florida. Five were wounded. The shooter killed himself and is one of the three dead.
If only those people in their yoga tights had been packing...
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 560 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 9:31 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 561 of 1184 (842589)
11-03-2018 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 559 by Phat
11-03-2018 9:21 AM


Re: Snubbing His Nose At Statistics
Phat writes:
jar may argue that Jesus did not advocate abolishing swords. The question would be where the swords "place" was.
I think it's pretty safe to say that Jesus wasn't in favor of walking around armed.
I doubt that statistics will ever persuade them to change their mind.
I agree. For what is almost a religious calling for them, facts don't matter. Or in ICANT's case, he doesn't dispute the facts but argues they don't apply to him because he's superman.
I have yet to see any stories on how guns prevented more death, but there may be one or two out there.
I don't think there is any doubt that there are examples of guns preventing injury or death. But they cause far more injuries and deaths than they prevent.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 559 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 9:21 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(2)
Message 565 of 1184 (842626)
11-04-2018 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 563 by jar
11-03-2018 7:51 PM


Re: Another snub nosed day.
jar writes:
Straggler writes:
Oh c’mon - You’ve gotta admit that there is a certain (how can I phrase this?) sensuality in your descriptions of firearms and related paraphernalia that deserves to be mocked. I’m half expecting you to start
your next post with something like A gun should be treated like a beautiful woman....
Yes, little boys like you often see such things. But soon you will grow up. Maybe.
It's not uncommon to become emotionally attached to beautiful and potent things, and your gun fetish is obvious, admiring their beauty and power and lovingly displaying them upon your hip. And no wonder, just look at the images! Look at the way the velvety supple leather holster envelops and molds itself around the gun, especially the barrel where bullets ejaculate out into the world seeking union:
And that handle! A matte black finish with a Taurus emblem inlay that conforms to your hand in almost euphoric fashion, your finger on the trigger seeking consummation. What's not to love?
Actually it's obvious what's not to love. Anyone in possession of a gun increases the danger to himself and all around him. Only an irrational and emotional attachment to guns keeps people from recognizing this.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 563 by jar, posted 11-03-2018 7:51 PM jar has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 568 of 1184 (842682)
11-05-2018 7:52 AM


Gun Not Locked Up, Boy, 11, Kills Grandmother, Self
From 11-year-old shoots grandmother, kills self after refusing to clean his room, police say:
quote:
PHOENIX An 11-year-old boy in Arizona fatally shot his grandmother before turning the gun on himself after refusing to clean his room Saturday, officials said.
...
The couple were sitting on the couch watching TV together when the grandson came up behind his grandmother and shot her in the back of the head, [Maricopa County Sheriff's Office spokesman Sgt. Joaquin] Enriquez said.
The grandfather first ran after the grandson before returning to help his wife. He then heard gunshots as his grandson shot himself.
Enriquez said the gun belonged to the grandfather...
Obviously the grandfather had not securely stored his firearm. Now his wife is dead and his grandson is dead, and instead of riding off into his sunset years surrounded by family he will be alone. He no doubt had the gun for protection against criminals, but as is so often the case (because you can't fight statistics), the gun was instead used against family.
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 569 of 1184 (842683)
11-05-2018 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 567 by ICANT
11-05-2018 12:44 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
ringo writes:
That's a silly distinction. An AR15 is a gun. If guns are tools, then an AR15 is a tool whether you have any use for one or not.
You have your opinion of what the AR15 is and I have my opinion.
I don't play with dangerous toys, and no one else should.
Guns are toys to you gun nuts. No one should possess instruments of death whose sole functions are threat and intimidation and homicide and suicide (which, of course, excludes hunting rifles).
But those that do have a constitutional right to do so. If people don't like it they can change it.
You obviously don't like weapons like the AR-15, having disparagingly referred to it as a toy, so don't you want to change the law? Won't you work with us to get them banned?
I can only guess, since you haven't responded to my Message 551 and Message 552, that you are ignoring me. You don't want to respond to my comments on the series of absurd things you said in Message 545?
You seem to believe gun registration important since you mentioned your belief that any gun purchased at a gun shop is automatically registered, so since no state requires that all guns be registered, and since less than 20% of states require any registration at all, and since registration that requires recording each gun's unique rifling pattern would help catch shooters, won't you work with us to require registration of all guns?
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 567 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 12:44 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 570 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 9:37 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 580 of 1184 (842701)
11-05-2018 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 570 by ICANT
11-05-2018 9:37 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
Guns are toys to you gun nuts.
Percy quit jumping to conclusions.
I'm not jumping to conclusions. You and Jar and Hyroglyphx have made clear that guns are your toys.
I said an AR15 to me was a toy.
Yes, I know you did. And I replied about guns in general: "Guns are toys to you gun nuts." Guns have no legitimate civilian purpose, except hunting for food (not sport).
That means it would be something to go out in the woods and shoot up a bunch of trees with.
Some people shoot trees for fun, other people pretend that threats might appear at their door at any moment and so they prepare their guns and peepholes and early detection systems and blow away the poor UPS delivery guy.
Problem is you can't eat trees and I don't shoot things I can't eat.
So you don't shoot things you can't eat, huh. So you eat the targets from the practice range?
The only exception to that is if someone was trying to kill me.
Glad to hear you won't turn into a cannibal when the criminal hordes appear on your doorstep.
There are weapons that are a lot more dangerous than an AR15. It just happens that the AR15 is the one the looney's choose to use.
The loonies are anyone who thinks they need a weapon.
Percy writes:
homicide and suicide
Most homicide's and suicides are performed with a pistol. Which is much more efficient than a AR15 would be. You could really hurt yourself with a AR15 without killing yourself.
If you'd bothered to read what I said instead of just excerpting three words from a short paragraph, you'd see I was referring to guns in general, not the AR-15.
Percy writes:
(which, of course, excludes hunting rifles).
The AR15 is classified as a rifle and can be used for hunting. But I would not recommend it for that purpose. In fact I would not recommend it for any purpose other than to show off.
Again, you should read what you're replying to. The paragraph was about guns in general.
Percy writes:
I can only guess, since you haven't responded to my Message 551 and Message 552, that you are ignoring me.
Percy it is hard to have a conversation with somebody that is continually calling you a liar, a fool, and an idiot by their insinuations.
It is equally hard to have a conversation with someone who is continually lying and saying foolish and idiotic things. It is, hopefully, within your power to begin making sense, though I've read ahead in the thread and seen that if you have the ability to make sense you haven't employed it.
Percy writes:
You seem to believe gun registration important since you mentioned your belief that any gun purchased at a gun shop is automatically registered,
I went to a gun show Saturday. They had 25 people that were conducting background checks on people. The people would fill out the papers and then wait for the results to came back. If they cleared the background check they were allowed to purchase the weapon they were trying to buy. If they failed the background check they were not allow to purchase the weapon. By law these papers must be destroyed within 24 hours.
So you're in favor of background checks for all gun purchases? Most states do not require background checks for gun purchases at gun shows. What state do you live in?
It is against the law for a state of Federal gun registry to be kept.
Don't you think gun registries would be very helpful in crime solving?
I would not be in favor of a State or Federal gun registry being kept as that could then be used to confiscate weapons.
So the only reason you mentioned registrations at gun stores is because you know they're useless because it scatters gun registrations all over hell.
I know you trust our government to do things in our best interest.
You know I believe Trump's a malevolent self-serving racist misogynistic autocratic force for evil, so why would you think that? I think we should elect competent trustworthy people who have the best interests of the country at heart. When such people are in charge then government can be an overwhelming force for good.
I don't trust politicians any further than I can throw them. They go to Washington with good intentions and after a few years they are just as corrupt as those that have been there 40 years.
Too often this is true.
I could trust them a lot more if they went to Washington served one term being paid the same as an enlisted man in the army and then going back to their regular life.
A more informed electorate would help, too. Trump tells the people at his rallies that (for example, there are a wide range of topics Trump lies about to choose from) Democrats want open borders and they believe him.
There has been over 5 billion dollars spent on the mid-term election. That money was spent expecting a ROI. (return on investment)
In politics there is a strong correlation between money and winning. It turns out advertising isn't especially effective, that it's more that the candidate with the best chance of winning tends to attract the most money. The rich are especially keen about making office holders aware they've donated significantly to the campaign.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 570 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 9:37 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 591 by ICANT, posted 11-06-2018 10:52 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 582 of 1184 (842703)
11-05-2018 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 571 by ICANT
11-05-2018 9:54 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
Is there anyone, not just in this thread but anywhere in the world, who has claimed that seat belts prevent motor vehicle accidents? No, of course not. Then why are you saying such a silly thing?
Straggler had put forth seat belts as a regulation on automobiles.
Insinuating that guns have no regulations.
Actually Straggler was quite specific that the context was motor vehicle safety. Can you cite any regulations making guns safer? I mean for the people on the business end of the gun, of course.
Cars are to be built to certain specifications and so are guns.
The specifications of the car will not stop it from having a wreck.
Hmmm, suddenly you seem to understand the context was motor vehicle safety. Interesting.
Improved car design has had a significant impact on motor vehicle safety. Over the years regulations specifying car safety requirements have become more and more stringent, making cars increasingly safe over the years with safety features like seat belts, airbags, passenger compartment cages, collision absorbing bumpers and frames, deflection mechanisms so the engine doesn't end up in the front seat, etc. Manufacturers have begun equipping some cars with crash avoidance systems.
Guns have gone in the opposite direction and become increasingly deadly over the years. Check this out:
The specifications of the gun will not stop it from being used to kill someone.
Oh, come on. A .22 with normal bullets is much less deadly than a .357 magnum with hollow points. From an ammo site:
quote:
357 magnum jacketed hollow point ammo is a great choice for folks that need a powerful self-defense round. Loaded with a hollow point bullet that is designed to expand upon contact with your target, these rounds are engineered to deliver the most amount of damage possible.
See that: "engineered to deliver the most amount of damage possible." There is no doubt that firearms have become increasingly deadly over the years. Regulation is necessary to abate this trend.
The human involved is the problem with both causing over 80,000 deaths per year in the US.
As shown above, motor vehicle death rates are falling, gun death rates are rising.
All I was trying to do was to show that government rules do not stop the activities of people in the use of autos or guns.
Well that's a silly thing to say. Of course government regulations don't stop anyone's actions, and not just for cars and guns, but for anything. What government regulations can do is make injury and death less likely, for instance (and as already explained in messages you ignored) by mandating training, licensing, maintenance and storage requirements, etc.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 571 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 9:54 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 583 of 1184 (842706)
11-05-2018 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 572 by ICANT
11-05-2018 10:24 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
You just never give up saying incredibly stupid things.
If you will look at your chart below this statement you will see a total kill number of 243.
There is no chart below your statement. Competent as ever, I see. I'll comment on those things I can figure out.
You will see a total number injured of 631.
There are many weapons that could have been used and the dead number would have been much greater. Depending on the shooter there could have been in the range of 500 or even 600 dead.
That is the reason I classify the AR15 as a toy. Not that it can't sling a lot of lead.
Okay, I see, you're making the point that there are deadlier weapons than the AR-15, that in fact it is so puny as an instrument of death that it should be considered a toy. Tell you what. Let's put you and a five-year old in a room and give the five-year old a loaded AR-15 with a nice light trigger to play with. Are you game?
If you're going to say stupid things then you can't refuse to reply using the excuse that someone called you stupid. When you're stupid then own it, and right now you're being incredibly stupid. The easiest way to get out from under a stupid comment is just to say, "Oops, sorry." Continuing this pointless stupid argument that the AR-15 is a toy is just, well, stupid, especially since DrJones* mentioned over a week ago that you can chamber an AR-15 up to larger calibers like a .45.
Just to help you out making the right decision, here again for your edification and enjoyment is the table of mass shootings performed with an AR-15 or equivalent:
IncidentYearKilledInjured
Pittsburgh Synagogue2018117
Stoneman Douglas High School20181717
Las Vegas201759422
Sutherland Springs Church20172720
Orlando Nightclub20165053
San Bernardino20151624
Umpqua Community College2015108
Washington Navy Yard2013138
Sandy Hook Elementary2012282
Aurora20121270
Moving on:
A slingshot with pre-WW2 red rubber and broke cast iron is pretty good for killing squirrels. It just does not have the killing power of a 22 rifle. The AR15 would classify as the slingshot compared to the 22 rifle when compared to many weapons that are available.
Still stupid.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Didn't mean to hit "Submit", was mostly done, just made a few minor edits.
Edited by Percy, : Minor edit.
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 572 by ICANT, posted 11-05-2018 10:24 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 584 of 1184 (842710)
11-05-2018 9:02 PM


Gun Nuts on the Border
I had to choose whether to post this under the Trump Presidency thread or the Gun Nut thread, and I decided to post it here in the Gun Nut thread. Those of you on or near our southern border, be forewarned: gun nuts are either there or on the way, as reported here: Armed militia groups head to the border, sparking military concerns
Why, you might ask, are militia groups heading for our southern border? Because our idiot president has been sounding the alarm about families peacefully approaching our border to apply for political asylum. Oh, pardon me, I didn't get that right. I meant hordes of rampaging MS13 members and tough hombres with drugs, guns, leprosy and gonorrhea threatening to overrun our borders to take our jobs, sell drugs, murder our men, rape our women, and spread disease. Excerpts:
quote:
Armed bands of civilian militia members are traveling to the southern U.S. border, where President Donald Trump has ordered thousands of active-duty troops to rebuff the approaching migrant caravan.
About 200 unregulated armed militia members [are] currently operating along the southwest border, says a planning document for Army commanders... pointing out reported incidents of unregulated militias stealing National Guard equipment during deployments.
The U.S. Border Patrol late last month warned landowners in Texas to expect possible armed civilians to come onto their property because of the caravan, The Associated Press reported.
Gee, it all sounds just peachy! I just feel so safe now knowing these wingnuts are there. Me, I think the true threat is Canada, which is taking advantage of the southern move of US troops to secretly mass on our northern border.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 585 by Coragyps, posted 11-05-2018 10:18 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 593 of 1184 (842727)
11-06-2018 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 591 by ICANT
11-06-2018 10:52 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
Congratulations on avoiding the question. You said you were at a gun show where they had 25 people doing background checks, and I asked if you were in favor of background checks for all gun sales, mentioning that laws about background checks at gun shows vary by state. You replied about everything but gun shows.
So you live in Florida, which has no law requiring background checks. Of course any federally licensed gun seller must conduct a background check whether it's at a Florida gun show or not, but no background check is required for private sales in Florida. Gee, I wonder from whom a gun buyer who knew he wouldn't pass a background check would buy a firearm?
So let's see if you can answer the question this time: Are you in favor of background checks for all gun sales?
We already know you're against effective gun registration.
Percy writes:
Don't you think gun registries would be very helpful in crime solving?
No. Because the crooks don't go to a licensed dealer to purchase a gun. So the guns they use would not be registered. Most weapons they use have been stolen from different entities.
You're wrong again. Most unjustified homicides are not committed by criminals - they're committed by law abiding citizens, or at least they were law abiding up to that point. Say a guy gets annoyed at the loud music from next door, takes his gun, and kills his neighbor. The police have no clues until they look up the rifling in the registry database and discover the gun is registered to the next door neighbor. Crime solved.
Or how about the recent disappearance of Jayme Kloss. What if her parents murderer used a gun registered to him? What if he stole the gun from a neighbor where he lived, which would considerably narrow down the search?
Percy writes:
A more informed electorate would help, too. Trump tells the people at his rallies that (for example, there are a wide range of topics Trump lies about to choose from) Democrats want open borders and they believe him.
What lie does Trump tell?
What lie doesn't Trump tell? If his lips are moving he's lying. The Washington Post keeps a database of Trump falsehoods and misleading statements which is at 6420 and counting to this point in his presidency.
One of the lies that Trump likes to tell the most at his campaign rallies is that Democrats want open borders. Even the most rabid Trumpublican, assuming he's informed, would know that's not true.
I was there when the following happened.
No, you were not there. You were alive at the time, but you were not there.
Didn't the Democrats promise Reagan that they would close the border if he would grant amnesty to 2.7 million illegal aliens in 1986?
You're misremembering. It looks like you're talking about the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, signed into law by Reagan in November of 1986. No one ever wanted the border closed or would want the border closed, not the Republicans or the Democrats.
They got the amnesty but did nothing to shut the border.
What idiot would want to shut the border?
They have had plenty of opportunities to keep that promise in the last 32 years.
Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want or has ever wanted the borders closed, not at any time during the last 32 years or at any time before going back to the nation's beginning.
Republicans have controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress for the last two years. If they really wanted to do something as stupid as closing the borders then the Democrats could not have stopped them.
So you tell me why I should believe they have changed their mind and are now for closing the border?
If they are not for closing the border then they are for open borders so Trump is not lying.
Why do you keep repeating the same insane stuff. Nobody wants or has ever wanted to close the borders, and if Republicans really wanted to close the borders then they have it within their power to do it. They don't need Democrats.
But Trump *is* lying when he says Democrats are for open borders. They are not. No one is for open borders, and no one is for closed borders. Why do you keep saying such moronic things?
The reality is that Democrats are as much for border security as Republicans, but they understand that walls are an ineffective way of achieving it. More effective border security would involve greater use of technology, improved data sharing and cooperation with Mexican authorities, helping Central American countries address the economic and criminal issues that drive illegal immigration, and increased manpower, training and equipment, including for the Coast Guard.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 591 by ICANT, posted 11-06-2018 10:52 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 614 by ICANT, posted 11-19-2018 4:09 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 596 of 1184 (842772)
11-08-2018 7:23 AM


Another Mass Shooting
Thirteen people were killed in a shooting at the Borderline Bar & Grill in Thousand Oaks, California. A Sheriff's deputy is among the dead, as is the suspected gunman. Only one handgun has been found so far. More as details become available: 13 Dead Including Gunman in Shooting at California Bar
It was college night at the Borderline, which was offering country two-step lessons. A number of students from Pepperdine were present.
This is late breaking news, more as it comes in.
AbE1: Washington Post article: 12 people killed, including sheriff’s deputy, in ‘horrific’ California bar shooting, police say
The gunman was tall with a black hoodie. He stopped to load a new magazine at least once.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : ABE1.

Replies to this message:
 Message 600 by vimesey, posted 11-08-2018 11:40 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 601 by Percy, posted 11-08-2018 4:57 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024