So it's his moms fault that all those kids are dead.... Please, continue to impress us with your flawed logic:nonono:
Feinstein's 2013 Assault Weapon legislation summary
- Thread starter KingJay
- Start date
So it's his moms fault that all those kids are dead.... Please, continue to impress us with your flawed logic:nonono:
Don't you have something better to do then trolling? Maybe get some tights on and go stop some crazy people from sawing each others heads off.
As gun owners i believe we are responsible for the safe keeping of them. The mother isn't fully responsible for what went down, but deffinetly should have had them locked away where he could not brandish them. I also feel that she shouldnt have taught him how to shoot in his mental condition. Thats just my opinon, but im not one to tell people how to raise there kids.
God damn it, Gump! You're a god damn genius! This is the most outstanding answer I have ever heard. You must have a goddamn I.Q. of 160. You are goddamn gifted, Private Gump. Listen up, people...
LOL... Ohhh, wow... that was quite the insult huh? Good for you....
LOL.... Rightttttt.... The American people elected him... Plain and Simple....
Deal with me why? LOL, because I jabbed back at someone who jabbed at me? Like I said, you are like a bunch of little bullies that get your panties in a knot when someone comes along and talks back to you for a change and then you cry like a bunch of butthurt whiners.... You just don't like other's opinions because they aren't the same as yours... You are no different than the crazies you claim you need protection from.
Can you do me a favour, can you point out to me where I said weapons of any sort need to be banned? I mean, the ban is coming, of that there is no doubt, but show me once where I said they should be, or agree with it???
Good luck on that search.
I think you missed the point on my quoting that.... it clearly shows what the legal definition of an assault weapon is in the united states.....
The Bill will pass of that there is no question...
And let me put this to you... Left-Wing Anti-Gun Nutjobs like me.... Do me a favour would you please, I also pointed this out to your other gun fanatic, can you point me to any post of mine in which I said I am against guns or in favour of banning them? Go ahead, I'll wait for you to find it...
In the mean time, see you have confused two issues here my incredibly ignorant neighbour.... you are confusing the argument surrounding the definition of assault weapon with the argument around the banning of certain weapons.. See you have your mind so focused on protecting your precious guns that you fail to even realize what it is you are arguing about...
YOU, and your other buddies, have taken TWO separate issues "What is an assault weapon?" and "Should there be legislation banning certain classes of weapons?" and combined the two... YOU did that, not me....
Still waiting for you to show me that post... I'll even give you something else to look up... Show me where I said I like the gun laws in Canada?
You know what though.... even given what has been said, and there are a lot of heated arguments.... I'd still buy you all a beer if we met face-to-face....
:beer:
Last edited:
So he couldn't have drove an hour to downtown NY city and bought one on the street for a few hundred bucks?
That's funny, because any other criminal can.
Since you are obviously unincumbured by the thought process, let me explain this to you. Yes, he could have done what you said. He could have also danced around the local mall with his pecker out singing christmas tunes but here's the kicker, HE DIDN'T. Apparently this is a hard concept to understand so read ever so carefully. He killed his mom, took her stash and headed to the school. Had she not had one, he wouldn't have. Why do you people keep making up crazy scenarios that never happened? Ohh that's right, because the facts don't support your position. The old FoxNews approach. Well played guys. Well played.
What drives me crazy about all you DIPSHITS and YES I am calling your dipshits who use the "no one NEEDS an assault rifle" as the foundation for trying to ban them. I have read COUNTLESS times that "the only reason for an assault rifle is to kill people.
Last year there were 31k deaths related to firearms. 59% of them were SUICIDES so roughly 12,700 were "criminal activities"!
HMMMMMM. Last year according to the CDC.
In the United States, smoking is responsible for about one in five deaths annually (i.e., about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure).1
CDC - Fact Sheet - Fast Facts - Smoking & Tobacco Use
SOOOO tobacco is 43 TIMES deadlier then firearms. Where is the "there is no need for society to have tobacco" campaigns?
Ok now lets look at alcohol!!!
There are approximately 80,000 deaths attributable to excessive alcohol use each year in the United States.1 This makes excessive alcohol use the 3r d leading lifestyle-related cause of death for the nation.2 Excessive alcohol use is responsible for 2.3 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) annually, or an average of about 30 years of potential life lost for each death.1 In 2006, there were more than 1.2 million emergency room visits and 2.7 million physician office visits due to excessive drinking.3 The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2006 were estimated at $223.5 billion.
CDC - Fact Sheets-Alcohol Use And Health - Alcohol
So alcohol is 6.5 TIMES more deadlier then firearms.
Do not get your f**king panties in a tizzy and tell me that "assault rifle bans" will save our children (and I do have 2 school age girls) when I have a 43 times and 6.5 times GREATER chance of dying from tobacco or alcohol!!!!!!!!!!
Last year there were 31k deaths related to firearms. 59% of them were SUICIDES so roughly 12,700 were "criminal activities"!
HMMMMMM. Last year according to the CDC.
In the United States, smoking is responsible for about one in five deaths annually (i.e., about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure).1
CDC - Fact Sheet - Fast Facts - Smoking & Tobacco Use
SOOOO tobacco is 43 TIMES deadlier then firearms. Where is the "there is no need for society to have tobacco" campaigns?
Ok now lets look at alcohol!!!
There are approximately 80,000 deaths attributable to excessive alcohol use each year in the United States.1 This makes excessive alcohol use the 3r d leading lifestyle-related cause of death for the nation.2 Excessive alcohol use is responsible for 2.3 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) annually, or an average of about 30 years of potential life lost for each death.1 In 2006, there were more than 1.2 million emergency room visits and 2.7 million physician office visits due to excessive drinking.3 The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2006 were estimated at $223.5 billion.
CDC - Fact Sheets-Alcohol Use And Health - Alcohol
So alcohol is 6.5 TIMES more deadlier then firearms.
Do not get your f**king panties in a tizzy and tell me that "assault rifle bans" will save our children (and I do have 2 school age girls) when I have a 43 times and 6.5 times GREATER chance of dying from tobacco or alcohol!!!!!!!!!!
You clearly do not understand the purpose and importance of the second amendment. All your arguing over Lanza and wanting to take away semi-auto rifles is moot. This is about freedom and RIGHTS. Clearly some people are willing to give them up for a false sense of security. YOU!
You want to talk about a problem? How were guns able to get into a "gun free zone"? Lets start there first. Banning the tool makes no sense when there was an obvious failure to enforce EXISTING laws.
There are so many things wrong with your analogy.
First there had been a huge increase in the legislation that bans smoking in public places, this no doubt has prevented numerous deaths from second hand smoke. Thus, creating legislature in this case, is helping to prevent deaths from second hand smoke, so you've just played a card for those "dipshits" to use. Good job.
Next, the number of deaths due to second hand smoke is "estimated" and not really known as a certainty..
Third, can you point me a case where someone has directly used a cigarette to kill someone else? Don't think so.
As to the alcohol, you've used a stat related to deaths due to excessive alcohol use. The point here being these people "chose" to drink it, essentially killing themselves. They did not use alcohol to kill others. Unless you are suggesting that alcohol is a weapon that can be used by one or more people to kill others. You may have been better off citing some drunk driving stats in which innocent people were killed. Then again, you'd have the argument that it wasn't the alcohol that killed, but the car and hence you'd be no better off.
Sorry, but it's a really bad analogy on your part.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
I smoke too, those people writing all those laws piss me off too.
Anyway, this is protected by the constitution and the intent was to resist the government when necessary.
There is no arguing this and unless you think the constitution needs changed, we are all in agreement that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Anyway, this is protected by the constitution and the intent was to resist the government when necessary.
There is no arguing this and unless you think the constitution needs changed, we are all in agreement that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Your sig: 2013 GT Premium Coupe blk/blk, Electronics Package, Shaker Pro, Track Package, Rear Spoiler, ordered 8/21/2012, Delivered Oct 15 at 3pm
Americans don't NEED a car that can exceed 80 mph. And since automobiles kill MANY times more people per year than guns do (see how stupid it sounds to blame inanimate objects for what people choose to do with them?), I say let's ban cars next. Especially high powered cars. Your logic of "needs" applies just the same.
Oh, but wait.... What if the US is invaded? Your fast car won't do much to defend the place. I think "assault weapons" would likely go further in that. But hey, let's start banning what makes this country one no other country wants to attempt a military takeover on.
LOL! No it's not. It's because you were driving like a ****ing idiot and killed yourself. And it's damn sure not an "accident" if you kill someone else (others in traffic for example) in the process. It's homicide. Vehicular homicide. Another word for homicide is murder.
You need a history lesson. Many decades ago, a country called Japan was ruled by an emperor who ordered his military to invade the US by ground and take over. The head of Japanese military basically told said emperor there was NO WAY he was going to do that as it would be a suicide mission since "there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass". We weren't talking about a .45 hand gun behind every blade of grass, but a rifle. The same type of rifle in function (with nothing more than an appearance difference) that the horribly ignorant and uninformed are wanting banned.
By that logic, ALL guns are assault weapons.
I know a lot of people who use ARs for hunting, though.
The ground work for what some ultimately want has to start somewhere.
Pull the number for deaths from being fat. McDonald's will be on the ban list, too.
Do you think it's possible that if we happened to live in some gun free utopia and a person hell bent to go on a killing spree might just find an alternate inanimate object to use as his weapon?
Well then I will focus on what he DID do. He used hand guns. But here's the kicker. Nobody is pushing for a ban on hand guns. And I haven't seen you spewing forth any profound thoughts on that either. No. We are discussing a very ignorant "assault weapons" ban relating to rifles. Talk about using something unrelated to the actual situation to push an agenda.
#1 you are from Canada so you have NO grounds to argue AMERICAN culture with me!
#2 In 2010, 10,228 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. GEE THATS ABOUT THE SAME AS FIREARMS!. GETTING MY POINT YET???????????????????????????????
Of the 1,210 traffic deaths among children ages 0 to 14 years in 2010, 211 (17%) involved an alcohol-impaired driver.1
Of the 211 child passengers ages 14 and younger who died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes in 2010, over half (131) were riding in the vehicle with the alcohol-impaired driver.1 MORE THEN RANDOM SCHOOL SHOOTINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In 2010, over 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics.3 That's one percent of the 112 million self-reported episodes of alcohol-impaired driving among U.S. adults each year.4
Drugs other than alcohol (e.g., marijuana and cocaine) are involved in about 18% of motor vehicle driver deaths. These other drugs are often used in combination with alcohol.
You have as much merit to have an opinion about America as I have as much merit about telling someone in Uganda how to not shit in a hole!
Again, so what? Let's say this kid never got his hands on a weapon and this shooting never happened. While that would have been awfully nice, who's to say this kid wouldn't have been the next Timothy McVeigh?
He happened to get his hands on an AR-15. Let's say he didn't. Do you think that would have stopped him from doing something? Nope.
Oh, but let's ban "assault weapons," as if that's going to really do a damn thing. The only thing it will do is take them away from people who have the right to own them.
Nope, that's case law, genius. That's a whole different world, and apparently you know nothing about it. Keep digging your hole.
Our leader is not a single person. Do you know nothing about our system of government?
You've got to be a troll, there's no way anyone else could be that dumb.
Users who are viewing this thread
