It's the Guns, Stupid

Apr 20, 2007 Full story: Truthdig 103,359

“And that's the end of the issue”

Why do we have the same futile argument every time there is a mass killing? Advocates of gun control try to open a discussion about whether more reasonable weapons statutes might reduce the number of violent ... via Truthdig

Full Story

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#110325 Sep 7, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
A bit of a premature celebration. No one said you are an adult yet.
Darling, no one said you were an adult yet either :) Right?
BUT, if you want to be technical...yes, you said adulthood starts at 30, and since Im 35, you've confirmed (in your own mind) that Im an adult.
Ty Ty Ty

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#110328 Sep 7, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
What happened was that criminals who had ALREADY committed crimes, were taken and prosecuted for their PRIOR crimes.
What is astouding about those numbers, but not surprising that you ignore it, is that an ASTOUNDING number walked away without prosecution. That means that ONE MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND people walked and all you did was stop them from obtaining a firearm at THAT location.
That makes your pitiful little 80K a mere pittance and a deplorable net result.
You avoided the YES or NO question:
Is stopping 80,000 criminals a year from legally buying guns a good thing...yes or no?

I have not ignored ANYTHING about them not being prosecuted. I have replied to that very issue in at least 5 posts...can you read?
The fact that THOUSANDS of criminals are denied every year is PROOF back ground checks work.
Trying to change the goal post to "have they been prosecuted" is a deflection from the FACT that the numbers show it works!
EXAMPLE:
"Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Walsh agreed, arguing that there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.“There’s no way the Department of Justice could have prosecuted all 1.5 million people who were rejected over that 15 year period.”
In the past, Justice Department officials have also said that these crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute, because it’s tough to prove that someone was knowingly and deliberately lying on his or her form."
Thank you Thank you Thank you....and coming from a republican^

Quit playing semantics and deflecting from the astounding numbers.

You said "and all you did was stop them from obtaining a firearm"....LOL! Isn't that a good thing? You imply that's it's not that great??? It makes you look desperate.

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#110329 Sep 7, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a bore. I'm outta here.
run away...run run run away :D
lol
I knew it
Good Aussies

Anonymous Proxy

#110331 Sep 7, 2013
Snow Bunny don't worry arguing with evil bastards who are the same guys who killed off 100 million Russians last century then created their holohoax propaganda to destroy little White children's minds.

They are also responsible for the Holodomor, the mass starvation of Ukranians, just because they wanted to.

They are also responsible for killing at least 1 million Arabs in their sick wars.

They are soon to be dealt with.
conservative crapola

Matawan, NJ

#110332 Sep 7, 2013
Odd isn't it how inanimate objects develop sentience and then go on killing sprees without any human intervention.

Odd how the violence and degradation produced daily by the liberal / Democratic media manifestations have no influence on those who view or listen to it.

And of course the systemic violence of the liberals / Democrats which condones the murder of unborn children has no influence on the way we value human life; certainly not making human life seem but a commodity to be discarded at our slightest convenience.

Liberalism = Violence
conservative crapola

Matawan, NJ

#110333 Sep 7, 2013
Good Aussies wrote:
Snow Bunny don't worry arguing with evil bastards who are the same guys who killed off 100 million Russians last century then created their holohoax propaganda to destroy little White children's minds.
They are also responsible for the Holodomor, the mass starvation of Ukranians, just because they wanted to.
They are also responsible for killing at least 1 million Arabs in their sick wars.
They are soon to be dealt with.
Quite correct. Odd isn't it how the role of the so-called 'Chosen People' in the great Soviet purge of the 1930's which killed millions is never shown on films or on television or taught in school? Jews headed Stalin's NKVD which brutally murdered more people than Hitler or Himmler could have dreamed of.

Odd how what goes around seems to come around.

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#110334 Sep 7, 2013
MD Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
So you can't back your claim. As expected.
No, it's not a "claim"....it's a fact.
I can't help that you are not educated on this issue.
The mere poit that I didn't post a link, doesn't change the FACT...that it's a FACT!
Refute it if it's untrue?
NO?....as expected :)

BUT...I'll play along and help you out!

The Facts -(from a site that acknowledges millions have been stopped since the bil started, but still feels it's unfair to deny thjose people guns....s the site is obviously unbiased to my point)
"All told, in 2010, the FBI and state agencies denied a firearm to nearly 153,000 people via the NICS system. To keep things simple, we will focus on the FBI, using a report on the 2010 data by Ronald J. Frandsen of the Regional Justice Information Service.
About 99 percent of people who apply to buy a firearm are quickly cleared. But about 1 to 2 percent are denied, mainly because the records show that he or she has a felony indictment or conviction. The data also show that about 5 percent successfully appeal their denials.
Applications: 6,037,394
FBI denials: 72,659 (1.2 percent)
Appeals 16,513 (22.7 percent)
Successful appeals 3,491 (4.77 percent of denials)

The main reason listed for a denial is a felony conviction or indictment. Here are some of the key reasons:
Felony: 34,459 (47.4 percent)
Fugitive: 13,862 (19.1 percent)
State law prohibition: 7,666 (10.6 percent)
Drug use/addiction: 6,971 (9.6 percent)

Read'm and weep little dude!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-chec...

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#110335 Sep 7, 2013
conservative crapola wrote:
Odd isn't it how inanimate objects develop sentience and then go on killing sprees without any human intervention.
What's even MORE odd is when people try to attribute gun laws to the actual GUN, and not the people. I think most people are well aware that guns don't go on killing sprees themselves. The POINT is that people USE those guns to go on killing spees and kill dozens of people in seconds with the mere pull of a finger.
It's the tool used.
conservative crapola wrote:
Odd how the violence and degradation produced daily by the liberal / Democratic media manifestations have no influence on those who view or listen to it.
Can you be specific of the "violence" and "degradation" you claim the "Liberals" produce daily? Maybe you meant foxnews, and hate radio?
conservative crapola wrote:
And of course the systemic violence of the liberals / Democrats which condones the murder of unborn children has no influence on the way we value human life;
Let me educate you! An embryo is not a "child"...and those violent republicans have no problem with the DEATH PENALTY or sghooting someone on their property for trespassing, lol...no value of life there...eh?
BUT, what is ironic is that the gun nuts feel their right to a GUN is un-infringible, but hey have NO problem with taking away a persons right to their OWN BODY!
Oh, the hypocrisy!
conservative crapola wrote:
certainly not making human life seem but a commodity to be discarded at our slightest convenience.
Kinda like when gun nuts shoot people for trespassing!
Got it!
conservative crapola wrote:
Liberalism = Violence
Lie^ Dumb^ ignorance^
Good Aussies

Netherlands

#110336 Sep 7, 2013
Tyrants with an agenda to be, well, tyrants, need excuses to disarm their prey. This has been done over and over again. Before guns were invented, the tyrants would disarm their peasants of swords, knives, machetes, and what ever else the peasants could use to fight back.

Here are two maps proving that gun ownership levels have nothing to do with homicide rates. In fact, in Africa, with some of the lowest gun ownership, there is some of the highest murder rates.

Guns per capita map of the world
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_...

Homicides per capita map of the world
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countri...

Ya think criminals who want more power would be interested in disarming their slaves? Huhuah huhuah huhauh whaddya ruckon genius?
Oy vey.
Wondering

San Francisco, CA

#110337 Sep 7, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>What's even MORE odd is when people try to attribute gun laws to the actual GUN, and not the people. I think most people are well aware that guns don't go on killing sprees themselves. The POINT is that people USE those guns to go on killing spees and kill dozens of people in seconds with the mere pull of a finger.
It's the tool used.
<quoted text>Can you be specific of the "violence" and "degradation" you claim the "Liberals" produce daily? Maybe you meant foxnews, and hate radio?
<quoted text>Let me educate you! An embryo is not a "child"...and those violent republicans have no problem with the DEATH PENALTY or sghooting someone on their property for trespassing, lol...no value of life there...eh?
BUT, what is ironic is that the gun nuts feel their right to a GUN is un-infringible, but hey have NO problem with taking away a persons right to their OWN BODY!
Oh, the hypocrisy!
<quoted text>Kinda like when gun nuts shoot people for trespassing!
Got it!
<quoted text>
Lie^ Dumb^ ignorance^
Who is the drag queen in your avatar? I hope they sued the doctor over the botched boob job.
Ah well

Long Beach, CA

#110338 Sep 7, 2013
We except risks every day.

It is a fact that we (including children) would be safer with a speed limit of 55 mph than the 65 we have.

It is a fact that we (including children) would be safer driving only the top safety rated vehicles as opposed to those that just meet the bare minimum.

It is a fact that we are safer in large vehicles (statistically) than smaller ones, yet we are allowed to choose the size.

It is a fact it is better for our health to eat a healthy diet, but there is no law restricting us.

Soooooo......will there be less accidental shootings and such if ALL guns are banned (which, whether you see it or not, is where we are inexorably heading), no matter how miniscule this risk is compared to, say, heart disease? Of course.

But let me ask you this: if we are willing to accept all the listed increases in danger to our lives or detriment to our health for the sake of convenience, efficiency, and fiscal savings, isn't our liberty worth atleast the same?

Learn from history. Our Founding Fathers knew tyranny. Ask the survivors of Pol Pot, or the Jews and others that managed to escape the Nazis.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#110339 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<...
Quit deflecting!
Still trying to order people around I see.
I will do as I wish. Your approval is useless and your demands are humorous.
Thanks.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#110340 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>I can deal with that.
BUT, why did you bring your age up to begin with then?
you seem like a very confused person.
Because I am older and smarter than you, with 5 times as much adult life experience as you.
Maybe when you get older you will see it was not confusion, but merely your youth and inexperience in determining reality and truth.
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#110341 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>I did answer about those denied being prosecuted.
Did you miss it? I said the point is MOOT!
The fact that THOUSANDS of criminals are denied every year is PROOF back ground checks work.
Trying to change the goal post to "have they been prosecuted" is a deflection from the FACT that the numbers show it works!
It is not illegal to try and buy a firearm legally. You simply get denied. A lot of people don't even realize they can't buy a gun, and they find out when they're denied. It's not illegal to TRY to buy a gun. It IS illegal to ACTUALLY buy it when denied.
Here's a good example of my point:
"Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Walsh agreed, arguing that there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.“There’s no way the Department of Justice could have prosecuted all 1.5 million people who were rejected over that 15 year period.”
In the past, Justice Department officials have also said that these crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute, because it’s tough to prove that someone was knowingly and deliberately lying on his or her form."
Thank you Thank you Thank you....and coming from a republican^
Quit playing semantics and deflecting from the astounding numbers.
Don't you think stopping almost 80,000 criminal a year from getting a gun is a good thing? Yes or no?
"It is not illegal to try and buy a firearm legally. You simply get denied. A lot of people don't even realize they can't buy a gun, and they find out when they're denied. It's not illegal to TRY to buy a gun. It IS illegal to ACTUALLY buy it when denied."

WRONG...it is illegal...that's why it's called a felony. Why are you defending the criminal acts of criminals...?

You even contradict yourself with this reference;

"In the past, Justice Department officials have also said that these crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute, because it’s tough to prove that someone was knowingly and deliberately lying on his or her form."

NOTE...they even said it is a "crime"...duh...all you and they are doing is making excuses for not complying with the law and allowing criminals to get away to get a gun elsewhere.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#110342 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Quit playing semantics and deflecting from the astounding numbers.
...
Make me.
I thought you would like me to act like you. What's wrong now that has you so pissed off?
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#110343 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>
1. It's not ONLY that we do not have the resources to prosecute an extra 80,000 people a year....it's not logical because we can't prove if those people knowingly knew they couldn't buy a gun!
2. Even republican senators agree...it's not just Biden you fool!
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Walsh agreed, arguing that there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.“There’s no way the Department of Justice could have prosecuted all 1.5 million people who were rejected over that 15 year period.”
3. There is a gun show loophole...and you know it! There are LAWS that require background checks....gun shows do not have to comply wiht that law...HENCE: The loop hole. Quit playing semantics :)
Use of the "Gun Show Loophole" has been advocated by terrorists you fool!!!!!
In the summer of 2011, Adam Gadahn declared that "America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms." He also claimed that, "You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card," Gadahn urged Western extremists to follow this path.
Don't be such a fool...you're arming terrorists!
1. Excusing criminal behavior...why are you defending criminal activity...? Ignorance of the law is no excuse...is it...?

2. "Even republican senators agree...it's not just Biden you fool!"

I don't give a rat's arse who agrees...it's illegal and should be prosecuted...otherwise, why have the penelty...?...why have any laws unless they get enforced...? Talk about a hypocrite.

3. "There is a gun show loophole...and you know it!"

No such thing. The law requires Federal Licensed Dealers to conduct the background checks for handgun sales...PERIOD. A "loophole" would be where a licensed dealer could legally sell a handgun without having to do a background check.

"There are LAWS that require background checks..."...FOR FFL DEALERS.

"Quit playing semantics..."

It's NOT semantics...it's the law...I just won't allow you or anyone else get away with attempting to redefine "loophole" to fit your agenda. The "gun show loophole" doesn't exist.
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#110344 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>This^ is how the gun nuts deflect from the numbers!
Instead of acknowledging that MILLIONS of criminals have been STOPPED (documented) from buying guns legally, they AVOID that part, and try to twist it into something bad, because they haven't been "prosecuted"! lol!
...without ever acknowledging the numbers they denied to begin with!
AND, here's a good REPUBLICAN example of WHY they haven't been prosecuted!
"Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Walsh agreed, arguing that there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.“There’s no way the Department of Justice could have prosecuted all 1.5 million people who were rejected over that 15 year period.”
In the past, Justice Department officials have also said that these crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute, because it’s tough to prove that someone was knowingly and deliberately lying on his or her form."
Quit deflecting!
Quit defending the criminal acts of criminals!!!
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#110345 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>
You avoided the YES or NO question:
Is stopping 80,000 criminals a year from legally buying guns a good thing...yes or no?
I have not ignored ANYTHING about them not being prosecuted. I have replied to that very issue in at least 5 posts...can you read?
The fact that THOUSANDS of criminals are denied every year is PROOF back ground checks work.
Trying to change the goal post to "have they been prosecuted" is a deflection from the FACT that the numbers show it works!
EXAMPLE:
"Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Walsh agreed, arguing that there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.“There’s no way the Department of Justice could have prosecuted all 1.5 million people who were rejected over that 15 year period.”
In the past, Justice Department officials have also said that these crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute, because it’s tough to prove that someone was knowingly and deliberately lying on his or her form."
Thank you Thank you Thank you....and coming from a republican^
Quit playing semantics and deflecting from the astounding numbers.
You said "and all you did was stop them from obtaining a firearm"....LOL! Isn't that a good thing? You imply that's it's not that great??? It makes you look desperate.
"Quit playing semantics and deflecting from the astounding numbers.
You said "and all you did was stop them from obtaining a firearm"....LOL! Isn't that a good thing? You imply that's it's not that great??? It makes you look desperate."

Talk about desperate...YOU defend the criminal activities of criminals...then you give a PARTIAL quote (disengenuous) of the person you're responding too...lol

Here is what he said...but of course that doesn't fit your claim so you have to alter it;

"...all you did was stop them from obtaining a firearm at THAT location."
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#110346 Sep 8, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>
1. It's not ONLY that we do not have the resources to prosecute an extra 80,000 people a year....it's not logical because we can't prove if those people knowingly knew they couldn't buy a gun!
2. Even republican senators agree...it's not just Biden you fool!
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Walsh agreed, arguing that there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.“There’s no way the Department of Justice could have prosecuted all 1.5 million people who were rejected over that 15 year period.”
3. There is a gun show loophole...and you know it! There are LAWS that require background checks....gun shows do not have to comply wiht that law...HENCE: The loop hole. Quit playing semantics :)
Use of the "Gun Show Loophole" has been advocated by terrorists you fool!!!!!
In the summer of 2011, Adam Gadahn declared that "America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms." He also claimed that, "You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card," Gadahn urged Western extremists to follow this path.
Don't be such a fool...you're arming terrorists!
BTW...did you catch the lie from your "terrorist"...? That of course is used and repeated to incite the wrath of the ignorant. I would say in your case they were successful.
frammle

Pittsburgh, PA

#110347 Sep 8, 2013
youtube.com/watch... ……
Guns are cool

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
May Arkansas shooting range exclude Muslims? 3 hr jeffry 1
Stutzman to Introduce GOA-Backed National Recip... 12 hr Tory II 1
National Recprocity !! Wed Tory II 2
Local Jews upset by Holocaust references in cam... (Jun '12) Jan 26 swedenforever 99
AK-47s, Now Made in AmericaBy Cliff Schecter Jan 24 Here Is One 5
Women Continue To Line Up For Concealed Carry P... Jan 24 Here Is One 1
ILLEGALS-Unions AGAINST AMERICANS Jan 23 ILLEGALS-UNIONS-v... 1
More from around the web