States with strict gun laws found to have fewer shooting deaths

Mar 7, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Reuters

States that have more laws restricting gun ownership have lower rates of death from shootings, both suicides and homicides, a study by researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University found.

Comments
4,721 - 4,740 of 5,070 Comments Last updated Aug 27, 2013

“Drink up! Summer's comin'”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5608
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
But I work for Walmart and I am "well to do".
Thanks to all that teabagger "welfare".
Couldn't have done it without you.
I need a vacation but don't have a home in Bermuda, so be a good teabagger and make sure I get my tax incentive this month.
Thanks.
Must be a retiree that did not plan adequately and now relies on Uncle Sam and Walamrt to make ends meet.
Poor Free Bagger

“Drink up! Summer's comin'”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5609
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Wall Street Government wrote:
The problem with Reaganomics is eventually you run out of taxpayer money.
Then get the Federal Reserve to print more and the "capitalist" are happy again.
Hmmmm....The problem with O'bama's bailouts is eventually you run out of taxpayer money.
Then get the Federal Reserve to print more and the "capitalist" are happy again.

Same story, different messiah.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5610
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Anti-Fascism wrote:
<quoted text>
Next time, be specific and put words in quotations and explanations for such words, clearly splitting them up to clarify your point; then it won't look like *you're* claiming those words.
It's *your* fault. Learn from your mistakes now.
You *still* cannot answer my original question concerning how so-called "teabaggers" are "dangerous," as you so cluelessly claim.
You embarrass yourself further. Keep going!:-)
NEXT time?

Watch the clip.

Learn from your mistakes.

I usually anticipate stupidity on topix, I didn't know I needed to make sure people use their brain.

I usually correct them after the fact, not before.

Teabaggers are dangerous because their STUPID and think their smart.

That is a recipe for disaster.

You're a perfect example.

Poor teabagger.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5611
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
NEXT time?
Watch the clip.
Learn from your mistakes.
I usually anticipate stupidity on topix, I didn't know I needed to make sure people use their brain.
I usually correct them after the fact, not before.
Teabaggers are dangerous because their STUPID and think their smart.
That is a recipe for disaster.
You're a perfect example.
Poor teabagger.
That Florida sun is bringing your ignorance out front, for all to see. Talk about stupid? Your use 'their' for they are, or they're and the reader is the one whose stupid? Go back to your English class Lil Boy?
Besara

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5612
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Wall Street Government wrote:
The problem with Reaganomics is eventually you run out of taxpayer money.
Then get the Federal Reserve to print more and the "capitalist" are happy again.
Said the urine-soaked fleabagger. You kneel and suck off big government for your sustenance.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5613
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Chicagoan by Birth wrote:
<quoted text>That Florida sun is bringing your ignorance out front, for all to see. Talk about stupid? Your use 'their' for they are, or they're and the reader is the one whose stupid? Go back to your English class Lil Boy?
Yes.

Much worse than commenting on a video that you didn't watch.

Much worse than commenting on a thread without reading it.

Poor teabagger.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5614
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Besara wrote:
<quoted text>Said the urine-soaked fleabagger. You kneel and suck off big government for your sustenance.
As the teabagger anticipates the trickle of corporate profit to "trickle" down as rain.

Poor teabagger.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5615
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Anti-Fascism wrote:
<quoted text>
Spreading your blatant misled opinions and/or lies again?
Why would they write this in the 13 Amendment of the Virginia Bill of Rights (1776)...EDITED.....
You're an hysterical gun-nut desperate for traction and taking out-of-context quotes from other historical documents to try to support your twisted view of the Constitution.

We don't form militias anymore. Thus, the right to bear arms is outdated and meaningless. We need IMO to substitute strong, modern gun-control laws in its place.

You can disagree, fine, but don't pretend I'm "lying" or whatever other childish insults pops into your tiny head.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5616
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Besara wrote:
<quoted text>Said the urine-soaked fleabagger. You kneel and suck off big government for your sustenance.
You just suck, period.'Nuff said.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5617
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Does that mean the entire Constitution is outdated? We have cars, electricity, computers and indoor plumbing. Do the rights recognize only the technology of the time?
What parts of the Constitutuion do cars, electricity, computers and indoor plumbing negate, exactly?:)

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5618
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Anti-Fascism wrote:
....EDITED.....He actually thinks our lawfully backed rights are limited only to the technology created at the time the Bill of Rights?
I mean, talk about clueless! lol! How could anyone ever bring up such an imbecilic thing yet not fear the obvious embarrassment that'd follow?
Only trolls, those with low intelligence, the insane or traitors specifically seeking to work with fascists within the system to overthrow our rights, one step at a time.
....EDITED....
Get someone to explain to you what a 'strawman argument' is, troll. And then please, stop preaching to yourself in the mirror and taking yourself so seriously....LOL

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5619
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

The 2nd Amendment did not become outdated as a result of jet aircraft, RPGs, or tanks. It became outdated as a result of standing armies, the National Guard, and police and sherriff's forces, not to mention the FBI, which protect us from attack from abroad and crime and insurrection here at home.

'A well regulated Militia no longer being necessary to the security of a free State, the 2nd Amendment right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall hereby be repealed.'

Let's vote!:)
Marauder

Valdez, AK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5620
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
You're an hysterical gun-nut desperate for traction and taking out-of-context quotes from other historical documents to try to support your twisted view of the Constitution.
We don't form militias anymore. Thus, the right to bear arms is outdated and meaningless. We need IMO to substitute strong, modern gun-control laws in its place.
You can disagree, fine, but don't pretend I'm "lying" or whatever other childish insults pops into your tiny head.
"We don't form militias anymore."

ROTFLMAO...right. Try doing a search on State militias...then come back and say "We don't form militias anymore."

"Thus, the right to bear arms is outdated and meaningless. We need IMO to substitute strong, modern gun-control laws in its place."

So you base YOUR opinion on the ignoring of actual facts to make your point.
Marauder

Valdez, AK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5621
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Get someone to explain to you what a 'strawman argument' is, troll. And then please, stop preaching to yourself in the mirror and taking yourself so seriously....LOL
DC v Heller;

"Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modernforms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 3536 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."

Repeated for emphasize;

"...the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
Marauder

Valdez, AK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5622
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

tha Professor wrote:
The 2nd Amendment did not become outdated as a result of jet aircraft, RPGs, or tanks. It became outdated as a result of standing armies, the National Guard, and police and sherriff's forces, not to mention the FBI, which protect us from attack from abroad and crime and insurrection here at home.
'A well regulated Militia no longer being necessary to the security of a free State, the 2nd Amendment right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall hereby be repealed.'
Let's vote!:)
The 2nd Amendment is NOT outdated. It was instituted "BY THE PEOPLE" (Bill of Rights restricting the gov't) in fear of some of those things you list...and they have only gotten larger and more agressive.

"Let's vote!:)"

NO! MY INDIVIUAL RIGHT is NOT up for a vote...period!!!

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5623
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
"We don't form militias anymore."
ROTFLMAO...right. Try doing a search on State militias...then come back and say "We don't form militias anymore."
"Thus, the right to bear arms is outdated and meaningless. We need IMO to substitute strong, modern gun-control laws in its place."
So you base YOUR opinion on the ignoring of actual facts to make your point.
I'm not talking about random collections of right-wng nuts, racists, and White Supremacists who get together to play in the woods on weekends, doofus. Those aren't real "militias."

My opinion is that a right to bear arms based only on the formation of militias is outdated, yes. Try refuting it instead of spluttering and babbline.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5624
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
The 2nd Amendment is NOT outdated. It was instituted "BY THE PEOPLE" (Bill of Rights restricting the gov't) in fear of some of those things you list...and they have only gotten larger and more agressive.
"Let's vote!:)"
NO! MY INDIVIUAL RIGHT is NOT up for a vote...period!!!
Not YET it's not.....LOL

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5625
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
DC v Heller;
"Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modernforms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 3536 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
Repeated for emphasize;
"...the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
Go back and read my post and try to comprehend that I'm not basing opposition to the 2nd Amendment, or unregulated possession of firearms, solely on a technological argument.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5626
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Of course, by REINTERPRETING the 2nd Amendment to include MODERN firearms, you gunners are doing exactly what most Righties complain about when it comes to Liberals - that they see the Constitution as a document which can be interpreted in changing ways based on changing times.

Heh
Besara

Des Moines, IA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5627
Jun 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tha Pedophile wrote:
<quoted text>
You just suck, period.'Nuff said.
Said the gutless pedo troll.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••