#NRAlogic

[kelly4]

what a weak rejoinder. your mind must be distracted by mama femspermy, as mine is.

You are correct, sir.

 

[UncleBuck]

Actually, listening to his counselor that said this boy is dangerous and going to hurt someone, it would have stopped it. There's no way of knowing if he could have gotten guns from someone else or not. Know why? he was crazy and people were shouting he was crazy. Crazy people tend to do crazy things.

universal background checks would have stopped that. or simply his crippling social awkwardness and shyness.

 

[Harrekin]

universal background checks would have stopped that. or simply his crippling social awkwardness and shyness.

We have all that shit already, people still get shot and I could probably buy a gun (if I had the money in cash) within 15 mins if I wanted to.

 

[ginwilly]

universal background checks would have stopped that. or simply his crippling social awkwardness and shyness.

Smokes pot and doesn't see the irony of this statement.

 

[UncleBuck]

Smokes pot and doesn't see the irony of this statement.

tell me how easy it is to go to a random town in the south and buy pot.

tell me about how much more you had to pay for it because of the prohibition on it.

you fail so hard.

 

[ginwilly]

tell me how easy it is to go to a random town in the south and buy pot.

tell me about how much more you had to pay for it because of the prohibition on it.

you fail so hard.

very

a little bit more but it never stopped me. I used to pay 400 an oz and would have paid more if I had to until I no longer needed to purchase any. Isn't prohibition stupid? Aren't people who think prohibition works a bit tarded?

Why do you want to create more criminals with a pen? you have stock in the private prison cartel?

How many people used high capacity mags in murders? How many people own high capacity mags? What percentage of the population has been law abiding with those mags will be affected by what percent of murderers you think words on a paper will stop them from having too many bullets?

Edit for Buck: I shouldn't say very. It's comparative. It's easier for a minor to buy pot in illegal states than legal states. It's harder for an adult but still not as much hassle as you think.

 

[UncleBuck]

very

a little bit more but it never stopped me. I used to pay 400 an oz and would have paid more if I had to until I no longer needed to purchase any. Isn't prohibition stupid? Aren't people who think prohibition works a bit tarded?

Why do you want to create more criminals with a pen? you have stock in the private prison cartel?

How many people used high capacity mags in murders? How many people own high capacity mags? What percentage of the population has been law abiding with those mags will be affected by what percent of murderers you think words on a paper will stop them from having too many bullets?

Edit for Buck: I shouldn't say very. It's comparative. It's easier for a minor to buy pot in illegal states than legal states. It's harder for an adult but still not as much hassle as you think.

i know exactly how much of a hassle it is, smarty. you just can't admit that it's tougher than you let on, unless you have a hookup. and even then, it can be dicey.

you fail the test of honesty once again, a common habit of the gun crowd..

 

[ginwilly]

i know exactly how much of a hassle it is, smarty. you just can't admit that it's tougher than you let on, unless you have a hookup. and even then, it can be dicey.

you fail the test of honesty once again, a common habit of the gun crowd..

As a traveling therapist I lived in 8 different states, none of them legal, was never without. It can be dicey, it is a hassle, but did it stop me? No.

You think prohibition works and you smoke pot, it's amazing. What logic is used in thinking murderers will follow bullet limit laws but not murder laws?

 

[UncleBuck]

As a traveling therapist I lived in 8 different states, none of them legal, was never without. It can be dicey, it is a hassle, but did it stop me? No.

You think prohibition works and you smoke pot, it's amazing. What logic is used in thinking murderers will follow bullet limit laws but not murder laws?

prohibition works in that it makes it much tougher to acquire cannabis and it costs more, it is a huge deterrent.

sorry if that makes you all butthurt.

 

[cannabineer]

soon they're gonna allow 5 year olds to vote, too.

try more conspiracy theories and emotional appeal, bear. it's very unbecoming of you, which is what i enjoy seeing when we have this debate.

Where am I entertaining conspiracy theory? cn

 

[UncleBuck]

Where am I entertaining conspiracy theory? cn

by supposing a zero bullet limit. we can't even pass universal background checks, ya know. total disarmament (or disbulletment) is floating in the clouds of conspiracy.

 

[cannabineer]

nice strawman, bear. nice conspiracy theory too. i could almost feel the dystopic breezes gently wafting across the hellscape.

sadly for you though, my position is guns good, massacres ewwww.

all you're doing is advocating for us to have the most excellently equipped mass murderers, your self defense remains uncompromised by massacre mitigation.

Then why do you keep describing them as killing tools? That is pure demonization right there.

My argument is not about equipping mass murderers. In fact, it's about mitigation. Compare. cn

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_killed_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_Kingdom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States

 

[cannabineer]

by supposing a zero bullet limit. we can't even pass universal background checks, ya know. total disarmament (or disbulletment) is floating in the clouds of conspiracy.

The Ratchet is the same sort of incontrovertible fact as your claim that smaller mags = less killing.

I'll gladly soften my stubbornness if you can show me that the Ratchet is not in effect. Can you convincingly deny that the ultimate goal is civilian disarmament except for the Privileged? If so, I am quite interested. cn

 

[UncleBuck]

Then why do you keep describing them as killing tools? That is pure demonization right there.

no, that's an accurate description of what guns were designed to do: kill.

The Ratchet is the same sort of incontrovertible fact as your claim that smaller mags = less killing.

I'll gladly soften my stubbornness if you can show me that the Ratchet is not in effect. Can you convincingly deny that the ultimate goal is civilian disarmament except for the Privileged? If so, I am quite interested. cn

if the ultimate goal is civilian disarmament, then explain why they did not renew the brady bill.

also, why the new freedom to carry guns into national parks. that's counter to what you're saying.

 

[cannabineer]

no, that's an accurate description of what guns were designed to do: kill.

Actually they are designed to shoot.

if the ultimate goal is civilian disarmament, then explain why they did not renew the brady bill.

Because they think they can do better (worse from my perspective) now. Information tech is rapidly mooting the idea of safety from registry (and its inevitable consequence. Name one instance (by nation) in which registry did not lead to confiscation. Talk about owning guns on the Net? Boom. The Internet is forever, and the Gov't has the horsepower and the will to exhaustively search and catalog everything ever posted. The only way for an individual to maintain privacy any longer is to maintain comms discipline. cn

 

[UncleBuck]

Actually they are designed to shoot.

the AR-15 was designed for the express purpose of military use. i don't think they're shooting just for fun in the military.

quit acting like these things are just made for innocent fun, it's very unbecoming.

Because they think they can do better (worse from my perspective) now. Information tech is rapidly mooting the idea of safety from registry (and its inevitable consequence. Name one instance (by nation) in which registry did not lead to confiscation. Talk about owning guns on the Net? Boom. The Internet is forever, and the Gov't has the horsepower and the will to exhaustively search and catalog everything ever posted. The only way for an individual to maintain privacy any longer is to maintain comms discipline. cn

since i don't have anything nice to say about that, i will say nothing at all.

 

[cannabineer]

the AR-15 was designed for the express purpose of military use. i don't think they're shooting just for fun in the military.

Not all guns are AR-15s. Of course guns designed for the military will be designed to shoot much and well.

quit acting like these things are just made for innocent fun, it's very unbecoming.





since i don't have anything nice to say about that, i will say nothing at all.

You cannot refute it either. Nonetheless I applaud your restraint. cn

 

[UncleBuck]

Not all guns are AR-15s. Of course guns designed for the military will be designed to shoot much and well.

no one's talking about banning those non-military style weapons (aka assault rifles, to use english words).

You cannot refute it either. Nonetheless I applaud your restraint. cn

the scenario you talked about is as unprovable as it is irrefutable, like shape shifting reptilian humanoids.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

I'm really confused. Killing is innocent fun. I get wood just thinking about shooting dipshit criminals like rapists, murders and those who would dare burglar my house.

 

[cannabineer]

no one's talking about banning those non-military style weapons (aka assault rifles, to use english words).

In every nation but our own ... history has shown otherwise. I do believe we will eventually have the Gov't say "give them up, people" ... except of course for Your Total Security Solution.

the scenario you talked about is as unprovable as it is irrefutable, like shape shifting reptilian humanoids.

Or like the soundness of Keynesian stimuli. cn