It's the Guns, Stupid

Apr 20, 2007 Full story: Truthdig 103,363

“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
Dan C

Roseville, CA

#83244 Nov 28, 2012
Dr Freud wrote:
<quoted text>
"Gee Einstein....maybe that's what the Zimmerman trial is about because he shot and killed an unarmed boy dumbass.
Evidence???"
What would have remarked, had Martin been shot by an armed woman, in the process of a rape?
But Trayvon wasn't raping anyone fabricator. Was he.

That's what paints your side on this so wrong....you have to create a non-existant scenario to defend that punk Zimmermans' actions.
CC Ryder

West Chicago, IL

#83245 Nov 28, 2012
Just found this today and found it very interesting.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/8293/gun-store-s...
Dr Freud

Riga, Latvia

#83246 Nov 28, 2012
Dan C wrote:
<quoted text>
But Trayvon wasn't raping anyone fabricator. Was he.
That's what paints your side on this so wrong....you have to create a non-existant scenario to defend that punk Zimmermans' actions.
I asked YOU this question: What would YOU have remarked, had Martin been shot by an armed woman, in the process of a rape?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION!
Are you afraid to reply honestly?
Dan C

Roseville, CA

#83247 Nov 28, 2012
Dr Freud wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked YOU this question: What would YOU have remarked, had Martin been shot by an armed woman, in the process of a rape?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION!
Are you afraid to reply honestly?
Has nothing to do with the Zimmerman case idiot. Zimmerman was not a woman and Martin was not in the process of rape.

You know moron....if Trayvon was as dangerous as you little punks want to make him out to be I doubt little boy George would have been able to pull his gun.

Zimmerman is going to do time for his crime.

Now stop supporting irresponsible gun owners and start supporting those with a brain.
Dr Freud

Riga, Latvia

#83249 Nov 28, 2012
Dan C wrote:
<quoted text>
Has nothing to do with the Zimmerman case idiot. Zimmerman was not a woman and Martin was not in the process of rape.
You know moron....if Trayvon was as dangerous as you little punks want to make him out to be I doubt little boy George would have been able to pull his gun.
Zimmerman is going to do time for his crime.
Now stop supporting irresponsible gun owners and start supporting those with a brain.
ONCE AGAIN, I asked YOU this question: What would YOU have remarked, had Martin been shot by an armed woman, in the process of a rape?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION!
Are you afraid to reply honestly?
Dan C

Roseville, CA

#83250 Nov 28, 2012
Dr Freud wrote:
<quoted text>
ONCE AGAIN, I asked YOU this question: What would YOU have remarked, had Martin been shot by an armed woman, in the process of a rape?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION!
Are you afraid to reply honestly?
Why not ask me why there are more red Chevrolet Corvettes than blue ones?

Idiot.

Your question has nothing to do with the Zimmerman case idiot.

Are you stupid enough to think the defense will use this ignorant question which has zero to do with the case at hand??

LOL!!!

I do know one thing....should I walk out my door and see you raping my neighbor I'd make spaghetti of your sad ass.

Now stick to the subject at hand asshat or shaddup.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#83251 Nov 28, 2012
Dr Freud wrote:
<quoted text>
ONCE AGAIN, I asked YOU this question: What would YOU have remarked, had Martin been shot by an armed woman, in the process of a rape?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION!
Are you afraid to reply honestly?
No it's a stupid question..but then you always go into hysterical scenario's that never apply...
rider

Marquette, MI

#83252 Nov 28, 2012
The NRA is supplying weapons of mass destruction to anyone that wants to commit a mass killing. And worse yet, they are like the Italian mafia, in that they have corrupted the U.S. politicians.
rider

Marquette, MI

#83253 Nov 28, 2012
According to FBI and Justice Dept. sources, in 2007 “self defense” claims were used by people charged with crimes involving a shooting in more than 5,000 cases nationwide, including murders and felony assault with a deadly weapon. Courts agreed the defendants – are you sitting down –acted in self-defense fewer than 250 times. In other words, of the known 5,000 cases, at least 4,750 shootings had nothing to do with self-defense. Only a terrorist organization would be as sanguine about rampant murder of innocent Americans as Levy and his cronies at the Cato Institute and NRA.
rider

Marquette, MI

#83254 Nov 28, 2012
every time you see an NRA member, remind them they belong to a terrorist organization that has the blood of tens of thousands of Americans and Mexicans on their hands - See more at: http://www.laprogressive.com/the-nra-has-the-...

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#83255 Nov 29, 2012
Just another law abiding citizen with a gun at the ready in Florida who just shot an unarmed black kid...Yep you law abiding gun owners are all sane till you go bananas, the kid must have attempted to shoot him with his finger...crazy gun owning lunatics.

http://news.yahoo.com/shooting-death-black-te...

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#83257 Nov 29, 2012
Teaman wrote:
"Really? Then can you name even ONE other president in history that was demanded to show his birth cert?"
Chester Arthur.
Shown or not, it's written into the Constitution. It's a safeguard so those not Born American cannot lead the Country. Like Immigration Law, it's to protect the Country. An example would be, for instance, that if Mexico decided to mass migrate and tipping the balance to win, by vote, a mexican candidate whose goal was to expand Mexico. Or any other country.

It should be automatic that ANY Presidential Candidate meet the criteria to become President. Whether it's an issue or not it should be checked and verified. I can't believe that no one in Congress might have heard a rumor and did nothing.

If the gov't doesn't follow what's set forth by law, we don't have a chance. Seems a person applying for a job at walmart goes thru a better background check than the president does.

Tray

Saltillo, MS

#83258 Nov 29, 2012
rider wrote:
According to FBI and Justice Dept. sources, in 2007 “self defense” claims were used by people charged with crimes involving a shooting in more than 5,000 cases nationwide, including murders and felony assault with a deadly weapon. Courts agreed the defendants – are you sitting down –acted in self-defense fewer than 250 times. In other words, of the known 5,000 cases, at least 4,750 shootings had nothing to do with self-defense. Only a terrorist organization would be as sanguine about rampant murder of innocent Americans as Levy and his cronies at the Cato Institute and NRA.
Typical liberal, you can't make a case with the truth so you lie. You twist the numbers to make them seam to favor your argument. Guns are used more than 2 million times per year for defense, most of the time they are never fired. The 5000 number you quote is those CHARGED but being as most self defense shootings are self defense the shooter is rarely CHARGED, you left that part out. Those CHARGED are those who law enforcement has evidence that it was NOT self defense. Anyone can claim self defense even some person who comes into your home at 1:00 am and cuts your head off with an ax but it will not fly in front of a jury.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#83259 Nov 29, 2012
Dan C wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not ask me why there are more red Chevrolet Corvettes than blue ones?
Idiot.
Your question has nothing to do with the Zimmerman case idiot.
Are you stupid enough to think the defense will use this ignorant question which has zero to do with the case at hand??
LOL!!!
I do know one thing....should I walk out my door and see you raping my neighbor I'd make spaghetti of your sad ass.
Now stick to the subject at hand asshat or shaddup.
If you have a strong case then answer his question. I'm sure you can do that can't you?
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#83260 Nov 29, 2012
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
No it's a stupid question..but then you always go into hysterical scenario's that never apply...
If it does not apply then why not answer the question? Are you afraid he may use your answer to make a valid point?
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#83261 Nov 29, 2012
Ahomana wrote:
Just another law abiding citizen with a gun at the ready in Florida who just shot an unarmed black kid...Yep you law abiding gun owners are all sane till you go bananas, the kid must have attempted to shoot him with his finger...crazy gun owning lunatics.
http://news.yahoo.com/shooting-death-black-te...
Typical liberal lie. You must lie to back your argument because you can't defend it with the truth. You claim unarmed yet the article you linked shows a shotgun was produced first by your 'UNARMED" black kid.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#83262 Nov 29, 2012
rider wrote:
every time you see an NRA member, remind them they belong to a terrorist organization that has the blood of tens of thousands of Americans and Mexicans on their hands - See more at: http://www.laprogressive.com/the-nra-has-the-...
Your logic is flawed, first off they protect the Bill of Rights from being taken away by a gov't that would if it could.
You know that old useless outdated piece of paper, obama called it.

That 230+ year old rag that gives you a right to call Bush a dumbass or Obama a traitor. That gives you the right to redress the Gov't without disappearing in the night. That kind of stuff.

I'll bet you couldn't give 1 example of a group that has done more to promote responsibility and safety to millions of gun owners than the NRA has. Children too with the Eddie Eagle programs.

You dumbass liberals restrict the word "Gun Safety" from even being taught at school, instead you teach,'oh stay away from that awful evil gun' That's a real smart thing to teach kids, ignore responsibility.

It's why you don't measure up in a rational thinking society that measures itself using ethics and character as a standard.

You don't have any.
Greasy Grass Ridge

Bristol, PA

#83263 Nov 29, 2012
whooyaa wrote:
<quoted text>
Your logic is flawed, first off they protect the Bill of Rights from being taken away by a gov't that would if it could.
You know that old useless outdated piece of paper, obama called it.
That 230+ year old rag that gives you a right to call Bush a dumbass or Obama a traitor. That gives you the right to redress the Gov't without disappearing in the night. That kind of stuff.
I'll bet you couldn't give 1 example of a group that has done more to promote responsibility and safety to millions of gun owners than the NRA has. Children too with the Eddie Eagle programs.
You dumbass liberals restrict the word "Gun Safety" from even being taught at school, instead you teach,'oh stay away from that awful evil gun' That's a real smart thing to teach kids, ignore responsibility.
It's why you don't measure up in a rational thinking society that measures itself using ethics and character as a standard.
You don't have any.
Obama was right.

Eddie Eagle programs? What is that? Some kind of child abuse?

GGR
Greasy Grass Ridge

Bristol, PA

#83264 Nov 29, 2012
_0rion_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Animals first/humans second is a belief common to all nutters.
Most of them are too silly to even realise they are nutters, though I guess when you're away with the pixies & fairies all the time it probably seems normal.
Member of PETA are we?
Or some other whacko group?
Sounds like it.
Dear Ornery,

That's right, call me names. I'm sure it makes you feel better about yourself.

Peta? Fantastic organization. They do so much for animals. They do the dirty work. They may be in my will as a matter of fact. Yes, what little money I have is going to animals when I go to the great beyond. I want to leave money for two animal hospitals - for people that can't afford to have their pets seen by a vet. I think that's wise. In my last will - I left my money to CHOP, but heck, they get sooooooo much money from really rich people. They are doing just fine.

So, call me a nut. I really don't care. lalalalalalalalala.

Animals first.

GGR
Greasy Grass Ridge

Bristol, PA

#83265 Nov 29, 2012
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Oh just a coat? OK just a coat today but tomorrow something else and more and more. Where do you draw the line? Oh you only get violated a little today and a little tomorrow and the next day and the next. I rip your coat today but you buy a new one but tomorrow I rip it ect. ect. How about this, you rip my coat I punch you in the nose. Hey it's just a little punch in the nose, no reason to go off the handle. How about I just punch you in the nose (no coat involved)? It's just a little punch in the nose, no reason for you to go off the handle.
Yes Trey, it's JUST a coat. Just because someone rips your coat doesn't mean-everyday something else will be ruined.

How about this, you punch me in the nose and I'll call 911 and they will take you away. Was it worth it?

Between punching and carrying and using guns~~~~~~~~Violent group of people.

Florence

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.

Australia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
"White Australians" learn your history 9 min Aussie Bloke 106
Melanin 1 hr St_Nick 27
God sent Muslims as a mercy to mankind 2 hr Grassclipper 22
WAR India v Australia, who will win? (Jun '14) 2 hr R-S-J 10,280
Australian SAS vs Navy SEALS 2 hr Grassclipper 58
What country will win Asian Cup 2015 3 hr Grassclipper 110
Why do Aussies hate Indians? 3 hr Hindu are evil 73
Gay Meet Ups in Melbourne (Oct '13) 5 hr Samkeith2000 820
Why should Australians fear from Muslims? (Dec '07) 6 hr Islam is love 46,566
Sally Field, actress getting married at age 68 11 hr Stan Dandyliver 6
More from around the web