joho wrote:
That makes liberals and terrorists on the same side of the issue. Neither expect to be ever offended by those that think differently.
Your nonsense is tiresome (but not offensive).
Now if only you had remembered to use the word, 'libtard' then your post could be taken much more seriously.
Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:
Sally V wrote:T Rexing, don't you know it is "fewer guns" and not "less guns?"
Thanks for the correction Sally. Hey, how many tackles did Lawrence Taylor have in his career again, what was that number you told us again, was it ZERO??
Sally V wrote:Those first responders to arrive at massacre in Paris were cops riding bikes with billy clubs. They were sitting ducks. If citizens with guns had guns nearby they could have intervened and saved those poor, defenseless cops. You liberals are nutty!
If you actually read the post you quoted, you'd realize:
I ALREADY said I support cops having guns. What was your point?
And as far as your rebuttal that "If citizens with guns had guns nearby they could have intervened", I already pointed out that LOTS of americans are armed, armed to the hilt, and somehow the "great intervention" where they all swoop in with their guns to save all the good guys from the bad guys with guns never occurs. We have WAY more mass killings like this than Europe does. This was france's worst massacre in over a decade. We have one similar to this like once a month. So much for: more guns would solve the problem. That's laughable. It doesn't stop it here. No, it makes is MORE LIKELY to occur and you know it.
So much for the whole "Never" Thing.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/texas-man-saves-cops-life-with-a-long-shot/Where do all the mass shooting occur in the USA? That is right in liberal "gun free zones."
Jeff Wigand wrote:
Scary Black Man wrote:Again, clinging to your faux liberal arguments is a waste of time. Yours and mine.
You haven't refuted what I've written.
Scary Black Man wrote:
That last time politicians decided to ban guns based on cosmetic features and magazine capacity they all lost their jobs. The same happened again in places like CO.
And that conflicts with what I wrote about politicians rebuffing broad public sentiment to note draw the ire of powerful lobbying groups how? You don't deny that most Americans favor background checks on all gun sales or that most support restrictions on high capacity magazine sales.
Scary Black Man wrote:
Reality does not align with your fantasy no matter how many times you may repeat it.
I'm still waiting to hear how, if lack of access to firearms makes a private citizen more likely to be a victim than one who has the ability to arm themselves, then why homicides in Japan are so infrequent in the face of their extremely restrictive gun ownership laws. Because criminals will just flout the law anyway, right?
What you have written has been refuted over 200 years ago, hence the RKBA. FYI, You are a little late to the party.
I challenge you or anyone else to walk into a gun dealers place of business and legally walk out with a gun without a NCIS Check and completing a form 4473. Sans an Eric Holder/DOJ Gun Give Away it is not going to happen. The whole NO BACKGROUND check is another faux liberal straw man used in a sad propaganda attempt to disarm America's Citizenry.
You keep bringing up Japan? Your argument is equal to that of saying because people are killed due to medical malpractice (much more than gun related deaths) that the absence of doctors would eliminate mal practice related deaths. I know I won't stop seeing my physician despite the number of deaths that are related to medical mal practice.. will you?
If Japan is your "utopia" why have you not made your way to The Land of The Rising Sun? I will tell you why, because no place on earth is better than The USA that is why. You and I both know this.
Finally, you are welcome to cling to your faux liberal notions and remain on fantasy island. Men with GUNS give you this freedom.
You are welcome for that.
Brand Nubian wrote:
I challenge you or anyone else to walk into a gun dealers place of business and legally walk out with a gun without a NCIS Check and completing a form 4473. Sans an Eric Holder/DOJ Gun Give Away it is not going to happen. The whole NO BACKGROUND check is another faux liberal straw man used in a sad propaganda attempt to disarm America's Citizenry.
Who's talking about walking into a store?
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opinionnw/2013/11/18/how-to-buy-a-gun-without-a-background-check/Last month, Tina Podlodowski went gun shopping for the first time in her life. After a few clicks on
http://www.armslist.com, the Craigslist of guns, Podlodowski was soon meeting a seller in a Shoreline parking lot. For $300, she walked away with a 9-mm Beretta, no questions asked.
Gun control is shaping up to the next big political fight in Washington. If all goes as expected, the November 2014 ballot will feature two gun-related initiatives. Initiative 594, sponsored by a new group called Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, would expand gun background checks to cover private sales, including those at gun shows, with the cost borne by the buyer. Gifts and transfers among immediate family members would be exempt.
In response, Second Amendment advocates filed Initiative 591, which would prevent such background checks.
Brand Nubian wrote:
You keep bringing up Japan? Your argument is equal to that of saying because people are killed due to medical malpractice (much more than gun related deaths) that the absence of doctors would eliminate mal practice related deaths. I know I won't stop seeing my physician despite the number of deaths that are related to medical mal practice.. will you?
I thought the argument was that keeping guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens makes them easy targets for criminals who flout the law. Is that not the case in Japan?
Brand Nubian wrote:
If Japan is your "utopia" why have you not made your way to The Land of The Rising Sun? I will tell you why, because no place on earth is better than The USA that is why. You and I both know this.
Or, or...we try to apply lessons to our own situation.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Finally, you are welcome to cling to your faux liberal notions and remain on fantasy island.
Just let me know when you refute any of my statements with facts.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Men with GUNS give you this freedom.
No women?
wejo wrote:
This is what was so offensive to the radical Islamic terrorists:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/07/charlie-hebdo-cartoons-paris-french-newspaper-shooting_n_6429552.htmlI haven't discussed this with Robert but think we should pick one of the cartoons and make it a splash page tomorrow. I'm open to what LRCers think.
Shame on the media outlets that have published pictures of the cartoons with the picture of Mohammed blurred out (NyDaily News, Telegraph, etc)
http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/some-outlets-are-censoring-charlie-hebdos-satirical-cartoons#.eeaKPMlW3oHere is a couple of editorials I like on the attack:
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/7/7509265/charlie-hebdo-cartoonshttp://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/former-onion-editor-freedom-speech-cannot-be-killed
While we are defending the brave Charlie Hebdo and their stance on freedom of speech, it is worth remembering that in 2009 Charlie Hebdo cartoonist Siné (Maurice Sinet) created a cartoon suggesting that Jean Sarkozy, the son of the French president, was converting to Judaism for financial reasons. Siné was put on trail for anti-Semitism and fired by Charlie Hebdo for the allegedly anti-Semitic cartoon.
If you really want to take a brave stance on freedom of speech, you could include some anti-Semitic cartoons and literature too.
Meanwhile there are still banned words on the letsrun forums.
That should be "Sine" but it appears that e (e-acute?) doesn't work on these forums.
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:
Scary Black Man wrote:I understand radical Islam for what it is... EVIL.
You don't rationalize with evil, you kill it.
And how exactly does one kill an ideology? Good luck trying to kill every on single person who is now or may one day become a radical Muslim.
We don't have the CIA and DOD for window dressing. Whether we kill every single terrorist should not be from a lack of effort.
You may live in a world of self defeat but AMERICAN Gun Fighters do not share in your defeatist attitude.
Jeff Wigand wrote:
Brand Nubian wrote:I challenge you or anyone else to walk into a gun dealers place of business and legally walk out with a gun without a NCIS Check and completing a form 4473. Sans an Eric Holder/DOJ Gun Give Away it is not going to happen. The whole NO BACKGROUND check is another faux liberal straw man used in a sad propaganda attempt to disarm America's Citizenry.
Who's talking about walking into a store?
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opinionnw/2013/11/18/how-to-buy-a-gun-without-a-background-check/Last month, Tina Podlodowski went gun shopping for the first time in her life. After a few clicks on
http://www.armslist.com, the Craigslist of guns, Podlodowski was soon meeting a seller in a Shoreline parking lot. For $300, she walked away with a 9-mm Beretta, no questions asked.
Gun control is shaping up to the next big political fight in Washington. If all goes as expected, the November 2014 ballot will feature two gun-related initiatives. Initiative 594, sponsored by a new group called Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, would expand gun background checks to cover private sales, including those at gun shows, with the cost borne by the buyer. Gifts and transfers among immediate family members would be exempt.
In response, Second Amendment advocates filed Initiative 591, which would prevent such background checks.
Brand Nubian wrote:
You keep bringing up Japan? Your argument is equal to that of saying because people are killed due to medical malpractice (much more than gun related deaths) that the absence of doctors would eliminate mal practice related deaths. I know I won't stop seeing my physician despite the number of deaths that are related to medical mal practice.. will you?
I thought the argument was that keeping guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens makes them easy targets for criminals who flout the law. Is that not the case in Japan?
Brand Nubian wrote:
If Japan is your "utopia" why have you not made your way to The Land of The Rising Sun? I will tell you why, because no place on earth is better than The USA that is why. You and I both know this.
Or, or...we try to apply lessons to our own situation.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Finally, you are welcome to cling to your faux liberal notions and remain on fantasy island.
Just let me know when you refute any of my statements with facts.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Men with GUNS give you this freedom.
No women?
Who is going to stop citizens from selling their private property? The DOJ...snicker snicker at that!
You have been refuted for the last 2 centuries. The 80 million guns in the hands of Americas Citizens have refuted you and continue to do so despite your denial.
We could easily compare the USA to Mexico. Guns are outlawed there too..how is that working out for them?
Women do not serve in front line combat units. They do play a significant role in our military and some are combat pilots. None to date have served in an offensive role as ground pounding gun fighters. This is a fact.
I know facts aren't something that serve you very well, but they are the facts none the less.
You are still welcome.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Jeff Wigand wrote:Who's talking about walking into a store?
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opinionnw/2013/11/18/how-to-buy-a-gun-without-a-background-check/I thought the argument was that keeping guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens makes them easy targets for criminals who flout the law. Is that not the case in Japan?
Or, or...we try to apply lessons to our own situation.
Just let me know when you refute any of my statements with facts.
No women?
Who is going to stop citizens from selling their private property? The DOJ...snicker snicker at that!
You have been refuted for the last 2 centuries. The 80 million guns in the hands of Americas Citizens have refuted you and continue to do so despite your denial.
We could easily compare the USA to Mexico. Guns are outlawed there too..how is that working out for them?
Women do not serve in front line combat units. They do play a significant role in our military and some are combat pilots. None to date have served in an offensive role as ground pounding gun fighters. This is a fact.
I know facts aren't something that serve you very well, but they are the facts none the less.
You are still welcome.
Correction:
300millions Guns!!!
80 Million Gun Owners!!!
Good on Wejo for standing up for free speech. Just make sure to keep yourself armed for a while afterward.
CIA DOD wrote:
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:And how exactly does one kill an ideology? Good luck trying to kill every on single person who is now or may one day become a radical Muslim.
We don't have the CIA and DOD for window dressing. Whether we kill every single terrorist should not be from a lack of effort.
You may live in a world of self defeat but AMERICAN Gun Fighters do not share in your defeatist attitude.
OK, so you are either monumentally stupid or just trolling.
Either way, good job!
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:
CIA DOD wrote:We don't have the CIA and DOD for window dressing. Whether we kill every single terrorist should not be from a lack of effort.
You may live in a world of self defeat but AMERICAN Gun Fighters do not share in your defeatist attitude.
OK, so you are either monumentally stupid or just trolling.
Either way, good job!
Is there an argument in your insulting response?
No, of course not, you are a liberal.
CIA DOD wrote:
Is there an argument in your insulting response?
No, of course not, you are a liberal.
Don't you mean "LIBTARD!!!!!!"
(and if you can't see the insane hypocrisy of your post, coming from the ALL TIME KING of "insulting", infantile, obsessive, idiotic "responses" with not a a HINT of an argument.....then you are f-cking helpless.
What part of "BUTTHURT" "LIBTARD!" "PU$$Y!" "TROOF" contained an "argument" ?? Lol. Because that is ALL you wrote for about 2 months on here, mr Butthurtosaurus Rexing/TyrannNasaurus Rexing (fake me)/SCARY BLACK MAN/BRAND NUBIAN/CIA DOD.
You are a hopeless idiot, and always will be.
Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:
CIA DOD wrote:Is there an argument in your insulting response?
No, of course not, you are a liberal.
Don't you mean "LIBTARD!!!!!!"
(and if you can't see the insane hypocrisy of your post, coming from the ALL TIME KING of "insulting", infantile, obsessive, idiotic "responses" with not a a HINT of an argument.....then you are f-cking helpless.
What part of "BUTTHURT" "LIBTARD!" "PU$$Y!" "TROOF" contained an "argument" ?? Lol. Because that is ALL you wrote for about 2 months on here, mr Butthurtosaurus Rexing/TyrannNasaurus Rexing (fake me)/SCARY BLACK MAN/BRAND NUBIAN/CIA DOD.
You are a hopeless idiot, and always will be.
Now this is an angry little liberal right cheer.
You can't make an argument to save your pathetic existence that is for sure!
Stay full speed ahead on the hate train (soon to be wreck) you are on.
CIA DOD wrote:
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:OK, so you are either monumentally stupid or just trolling.
Either way, good job!
Is there an argument in your insulting response?
No, of course not, you are a liberal.
Well done my little stupid friend. Well done indeed!
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:
CIA DOD wrote:Is there an argument in your insulting response?
No, of course not, you are a liberal.
Well done my little stupid friend. Well done indeed!
That's is all you have? Typical lib, Zero argument, zero substance, just blind hate and ignorance.
This is why you will always lose. You are the evil bad guy and I am the good guy. You are a self defeatest and I the eternal optimist. Nothing excuses Islamist terrorist, you kill them no matter what it takes. You don't nation build, you don't make nice with liberal PC crap. You kill them and leave their widows weeping in the street. And then we repeat as necessary.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Who is going to stop citizens from selling their private property? The DOJ...snicker snicker at that!
Oh so you were incorrect/mistaken/lying when you wrote earlier that it was incorrect to say that firearms could be purchased without a background check.
Brand Nubian wrote:
You have been refuted for the last 2 centuries. The 80 million guns in the hands of Americas Citizens have refuted you and continue to do so despite your denial.
How is that addressing the wide, popular support for universal background checks and limitations on magazine capacity?
Brand Nubian wrote:
We could easily compare the USA to Mexico. Guns are outlawed there too..how is that working out for them?
...so your point is that both the United States and Mexico would fare better if they followed Japan's methods? I'm not sure if the US needs to be as restrictive as Japan, but to each his own.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Women do not serve in front line combat units. They do play a significant role in our military and some are combat pilots. None to date have served in an offensive role as ground pounding gun fighters. This is a fact.
Which looks to change:
WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Jan. 24, 2014) -- About 33,000 of the positions in the Army today that are closed to women are closed because they were in units that were designated as direct ground combat. That will change this year in units that are not under Army Special Operations.
...
...and women Soldiers may have the opportunity to serve in every position, unit, and MOSs where a male Soldier can currently serve.
Brand Nubian wrote:
I know facts aren't something that serve you very well, but they are the facts none the less..
You have yet to present any facts as to refute the facts that I've presented that it is incredibly unlikely that a personal firearm will be used to disable an assailant, that household firearms are far more likely to be used on a member of the household than on an intruder and that most Americans support universal background checks at all firearm sales and restrictions on magazine capacity.
Jeff Wigand wrote:
Brand Nubian wrote:Who is going to stop citizens from selling their private property? The DOJ...snicker snicker at that!
Oh so you were incorrect/mistaken/lying when you wrote earlier that it was incorrect to say that firearms could be purchased without a background check.
Brand Nubian wrote:
You have been refuted for the last 2 centuries. The 80 million guns in the hands of Americas Citizens have refuted you and continue to do so despite your denial.
How is that addressing the wide, popular support for universal background checks and limitations on magazine capacity?
Brand Nubian wrote:
We could easily compare the USA to Mexico. Guns are outlawed there too..how is that working out for them?
...so your point is that both the United States and Mexico would fare better if they followed Japan's methods? I'm not sure if the US needs to be as restrictive as Japan, but to each his own.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Women do not serve in front line combat units. They do play a significant role in our military and some are combat pilots. None to date have served in an offensive role as ground pounding gun fighters. This is a fact.
Which looks to change:
http://www.army.mil/article/118930/Army_to_open_33_000_positions_to_female_Soldiers_in_April/WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Jan. 24, 2014) -- About 33,000 of the positions in the Army today that are closed to women are closed because they were in units that were designated as direct ground combat. That will change this year in units that are not under Army Special Operations.
...
...and women Soldiers may have the opportunity to serve in every position, unit, and MOSs where a male Soldier can currently serve.
Brand Nubian wrote:
I know facts aren't something that serve you very well, but they are the facts none the less..
You have yet to present any facts as to refute the facts that I've presented that it is incredibly unlikely that a personal firearm will be used to disable an assailant, that household firearms are far more likely to be used on a member of the household than on an intruder and that most Americans support universal background checks at all firearm sales and restrictions on magazine capacity.
It is evident that you are going to remain on fantasy island or is it Japan? Either way...
We, all 80 million gun owners and I, will just have to agree to disagree with you.
Carry on living in fantasy land, and I will continue TO CARRY.
...as will 80 million other Americans.
That is the greatness of America I am free to be armed and you are free to NOT be.
Everyone is HAPPY everyone WINS.
Brand Nubian wrote:
We, all 80 million gun owners and I, will just have to agree to disagree with you.
92% of gun owners in America support universal background checks. You have a funny way of saying, "I have no data to support my position."
Brand Nubian wrote:
I will continue TO CARRY.
...a weapon that is far more likely to be used on a member of your own household than on an assailant.
Brand Nubian wrote:
Everyone is HAPPY everyone WINS.
More people per capita die in firearm homicides in the United States than in any other developed nation.
Free advice: keep your email address straight when switching your handle.