Texas Children Fighting Back?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Sorry Irish, I couldn’t resist a chance to stick in a jab at Liberals. You are right, it’s not a right vs left issue. However, typically it is the right that supports taking responsibility for one’s own safety in the form of gun ownership; something that the left most always opposes. So by extension someone could assume that the left would typically be more passive in terms of self-protection.

The way I see it is that companies make big bucks selling weapons.
They are sold directly to criminals and psychopats, or end up in their hands indirectly. And they use the NRA to get away with it.
But hey, that’s not their problem, why don’t you take responsibility for your own safety you bloody liberal?

If I were in the US, I’d shoot the first NRA representative in the nut-sack. And I would urge all other liberals to do the same.

Would take care of the issue real fast.

So using your “logic” we should then also hold the pharmaceutical companies to the same standard and hold them responsible for people illegally obtaining controlled drugs and using/selling them on the street?
[/quote]

Yeah, my brother is serving life for shooting our neighbor with a bag of marijuana…

42

[quote]Wreckless wrote:

If I were in the US, I’d shoot the first NRA representative in the nut-sack. And I would urge all other liberals to do the same.

Would take care of the issue real fast.[/quote]

Weapons, abused as they are, have done more to liberate humans from repressive governments than just about anything. The ability to exert power, to fight back, forced governments to recognize individuals. This is one reason governments, like the Nazis, confiscate all weapons.

43

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Sorry Irish, I couldn’t resist a chance to stick in a jab at Liberals. You are right, it’s not a right vs left issue. However, typically it is the right that supports taking responsibility for one’s own safety in the form of gun ownership; something that the left most always opposes. So by extension someone could assume that the left would typically be more passive in terms of self-protection.

The way I see it is that companies make big bucks selling weapons.
They are sold directly to criminals and psychopats, or end up in their hands indirectly. And they use the NRA to get away with it.
But hey, that’s not their problem, why don’t you take responsibility for your own safety you bloody liberal?

If I were in the US, I’d shoot the first NRA representative in the nut-sack. And I would urge all other liberals to do the same.

Would take care of the issue real fast.

So using your “logic” we should then also hold the pharmaceutical companies to the same standard and hold them responsible for people illegally obtaining controlled drugs and using/selling them on the street?
[/quote]

If a large part of their turnover is sold illegally, then yes.
If they sell it directly and knowingly to organised crime, then yes.
If they loby in Washington to make it harder for the police to proove their link to organised crime, then yes.

44

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
That happens all the time in Texas. In Texas anyone can get a concealed weapon permit and carry a gun. So criminals think twice before going after someone because they may be packing.

Also, a kid could just as easily get a baseball bat and hit someone in the head with it.

You are an idiot if you think removing guns will stop violence. It may reduce gun violence, but it will just increase some other forms of violence like knives, etc.

[/quote]

I’m not saying it will stop violence. I’m glad you agree it will reduce gun violence though.
See, that wasn’t that hard.

45

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
Uh. Few Canadians = Fewer Gun Deaths.
[/quote]

You’re acting retarded on purpose again I hope?

46

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
Somone better DO something in Canada! They are using guns up there to kill THEMSELVES!! Oh, Canadians are liars too. But you knew that.

“By comparing the number of fatal firearms accidents and suicides per 100,000 firearms in Canada and the United States this article finds that the rate of accidental shootings and suicides is considerably higher in Canada. The authors propose that these findings are a consequence of underreporting the true number of firearms in Canada. The findings suggest that the number of firearms in circulation in Canada is at least 10 million, about forty percent greater than estimated by the Canada Firearms Centre. Such findings have implications for evaluating the success of Bill C-68, legislation that made it mandatory to license all Canadian gun owners and register all firearms. G.L. Mays is a Professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at New Mexico State University. Rick Ruddell is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at California State University, Chico. This study was completed with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada dissertation grant award 752-00-0357.”

http://www.saf.org/JFPP14ch3.htm[/quote]

A fake study. The gun related death per capita should be compared, not per registerred firearm.

47

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Wreckless wrote:

If I were in the US, I’d shoot the first NRA representative in the nut-sack. And I would urge all other liberals to do the same.

Would take care of the issue real fast.

Weapons, abused as they are, have done more to liberate humans from repressive governments than just about anything. The ability to exert power, to fight back, forced governments to recognize individuals. This is one reason governments, like the Nazis, confiscate all weapons.

[/quote]

Oh please. Even you can’t be stupid enough to believe this crap.
There are lots of democracies all over the world where guns are strictly controlled.
There are also countries all over the world where every family has one or several guns, and still they are not shining beakens of democracy. How about Syria, Irak, Iran, hell the entire middle-east.
Siberia, South and Central-America. By counting the number of guns, all these countries should be peacefull democracies, liberated from repressive governments…

Yeah right.

48

[quote]Wreckless wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Sorry Irish, I couldn’t resist a chance to stick in a jab at Liberals. You are right, it’s not a right vs left issue. However, typically it is the right that supports taking responsibility for one’s own safety in the form of gun ownership; something that the left most always opposes. So by extension someone could assume that the left would typically be more passive in terms of self-protection.

The way I see it is that companies make big bucks selling weapons.
They are sold directly to criminals and psychopats, or end up in their hands indirectly. And they use the NRA to get away with it.
But hey, that’s not their problem, why don’t you take responsibility for your own safety you bloody liberal?

If I were in the US, I’d shoot the first NRA representative in the nut-sack. And I would urge all other liberals to do the same.

Would take care of the issue real fast.

So using your “logic” we should then also hold the pharmaceutical companies to the same standard and hold them responsible for people illegally obtaining controlled drugs and using/selling them on the street?

If a large part of their turnover is sold illegally, then yes.
If they sell it directly and knowingly to organised crime, then yes.
If they loby in Washington to make it harder for the police to proove their link to organised crime, then yes.[/quote]

I think you are going to have to prove some of those statements. If gun makers are selling directly to organized crime, which would be against the law, then they should be charged for that crime. But other than that, we need to hold people responsible who pull the trigger. Because it if wasn’t a trigger it would be a blade, club, chain, etc.

So what is the point of reducing gun violence and replacing it with other violence? People still get killed and hurt. So we say that our gun violence is down but the same number of people are dieing from violence of other means, what is the point?

49

[quote]Wreckless wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Wreckless wrote:

If I were in the US, I’d shoot the first NRA representative in the nut-sack. And I would urge all other liberals to do the same.

Would take care of the issue real fast.

Weapons, abused as they are, have done more to liberate humans from repressive governments than just about anything. The ability to exert power, to fight back, forced governments to recognize individuals. This is one reason governments, like the Nazis, confiscate all weapons.

Oh please. Even you can’t be stupid enough to believe this crap.
There are lots of democracies all over the world where guns are strictly controlled.
There are also countries all over the world where every family has one or several guns, and still they are not shining beakens of democracy. How about Syria, Irak, Iran, hell the entire middle-east.
Siberia, South and Central-America. By counting the number of guns, all these countries should be peacefull democracies, liberated from repressive governments…

Yeah right.[/quote]

What headhunter stated is true, Hitler did outlaw gun ownership by people to maintain control. It is also true that you are responsible for your own safety, not the police and not the government. Subjects are not allowed to have weapons to protect themselves but citizens are.