Gun Control Thread- Should we?

[Giantone]

[QUOTE=RedskinRat;980595]When did I make fun of the murders in Conn?


post#347

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

post#347

That was your posted article, it quite clearly states she's from Zion, NOT a mother of a Conn shooting victim.

The Zionsville, Ind. stay-at-home mother of five was so angry and frustrated after the Newtown shootings that she started a Facebook page and website.

So I didn't make fun of the murders. Apologize, please.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

That was your posted article, it quite clearly states she's from Zion, NOT a mother of a Conn shooting victim.

The Zionsville, Ind. stay-at-home mother of five was so angry and frustrated after the Newtown shootings that she started a Facebook page and website.

So I didn't make fun of the murders. Apologize, please.

You have made a mockery of the whole discussion,which is pretty much what the NRA tells the gun culture in this country to do .

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

That was your posted article, it quite clearly states she's from Zion, NOT a mother of a Conn shooting victim.

The Zionsville, Ind. stay-at-home mother of five was so angry and frustrated after the Newtown shootings that she started a Facebook page and website.

So I didn't make fun of the murders. Apologize, please.

So a woman does something she feels might be helpful in anyway after the killings in Conn,you mock her,and think I need to apologize,cold day in hell.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So a woman does something she feels might be helpful in anyway after the killings in Conn,you mock her,and think I need to apologize,cold day in hell.

So a woman as an activist is above mocking? Funny, after one of the most negative presidential campaigns in recent history, NOW you're against mocking people in politics? THAT'S what you want to focus this discussion on now?

As RR said earlier, "If that's the best you've got..."

I can understand not LIKING his joke. But the one making a mockery of the discussion, or should I say making a mockery THE discussion, at this point is yourself.

Here's hoping the discussion gets back on track. I've enjoyed reading what others have said, both agreeing and disagreeing.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

So a woman as an activist is above mocking? Funny, after one of the most negative presidential campaigns in recent history, NOW you're against mocking people in politics? THAT'S what you want to focus this discussion on now?

As RR said earlier, "If that's the best you've got..."

I can understand not LIKING his joke. But the one making a mockery of the discussion, or should I say making a mockery THE discussion, at this point is yourself.

Here's hoping the discussion gets back on track. I've enjoyed reading what others have said, both agreeing and disagreeing.

This has nothing to do with a Presidental campaign,this is not political but again the NRA will tell it is,so you believe.I know many a lifetime republican who is for very strict gun control,I also know a few hunters who as long as they are allowed to hunt are fine with more laws,they agree no one needs to own a AK47 or machine gun to hunt.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

This has nothing to do with a Presidental campaign

It's the overall tone to your argument, the same tired tactics.

Originally Posted by Giantone

....this is not political but again the NRA will tell it is,so you believe

Yeah, all gun owners are NRA members. <rolls_eyes> It's more your side telling everyone that the case. It IS political, but driven from the liberal, anti-gun adjenda.

Originally Posted by Giantone

I know many a lifetime republican who is for very strict gun control,I also know a few hunters who as long as they are allowed to hunt are fine with more laws,they agree no one needs to own a AK47 or machine gun to hunt.

Some of my best friends are black. GTFOOH, you lying weasel!

You're on the wrong end so you attempt to change the conversation to something you're more comfortable with.

At no point did I mock the Conn shooting victims and it's pretty low for you to even suggest it. It's also similar in the way liberals throw the word racism around when they want to bring a conversation back to their terms.

Point being, you accused me of something anyone here can see I didn't do. You are now trying to reframe the 2nd Amendment as a 'hunters only' issue. What part of the 2nd Amendment do you need explained to you?

You're an utter cunt for trying to use a vile assertion like making fun of shooting victims. You know you're wrong, and like another poster on here, when your position is shown to be invalid you use bluff, demands and misdirection in an attempt to garner popular support.

Back on track: This is about gun control. We have an overwhelming amount to gun laws on the books, they should be better enforced.

People need to be better neighbors, care for each other more and get help for people who need it.

[RedskinRat]

Here's my solution:

From birth your behavior is recorded on a database.

For every positive action you gain credit, for every negative you lose credit. When you need to learn to drive, buy a house, a gun, drugs etc your rating is checked against the database. Simple.

This would also give 'society' as a whole a chance to correct negative behavior.

“Gun control is half-baked pacifism that…has as its corollary a duopoly of force in the hands of the state and the criminal.” C Hitchens

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Here's my solution:

From birth your behavior is recorded on a database.

For every positive action you gain credit, for every negative you lose credit. When you need to learn to drive, buy a house, a gun, drugs etc your rating is checked against the database. Simple.

This would also give 'society' as a whole a chance to correct negative behavior.

“Gun control is half-baked pacifism that…has as its corollary a duopoly of force in the hands of the state and the criminal.” C Hitchens

Play god much?

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Giantone

This has nothing to do with a Presidental campaign,this is not political but again the NRA will tell it is,so you believe.

So you are OK with mocking, just only when it suits you. If you really feel this is not political, then don't propose any changes to current law in this thread.

Wow, the NRA must have me believing that concealed carry is wonderful then. Oh wait I think I said something about that earlier. I think you owe me an apology in this thread too. Nevermind whether you have any independent thoughts of your own on this.

Originally Posted by Giantone

I know many a lifetime republican who is for very strict gun control,I also know a few hunters who as long as they are allowed to hunt are fine with more laws,they agree no one needs to own a AK47 or machine gun to hunt.

And there are many people I know, and there are more democrats here in NC than people you know, that are opposed to any new gun control laws. I guess that settles it in favor of not having any new gun laws, right?

And again, how are people with legal gun ownership EVER going to trust anybody arguing as you are, after the stunt that newspaper pulled? It's proof that some people, including yourself from your reaction to it this thread, can't be trusted to not abuse any registrations that are put in place. This stunt didn't have the effect the folks at the paper wanted, because they (like you) evidently don't understand people who disagree with them. But the intent to harass people following the law was clear.

[RedskinRat]

I'm an Atheist, I don't believe in me.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

It's the overall tone to your argument, the same tired tactics.



Yeah, all gun owners are NRA members. <rolls_eyes> It's more your side telling everyone that the case. It IS political, but driven from the liberal, anti-gun adjenda.




Some of my best friends are black. GTFOOH, you lying weasel!

You're on the wrong end so you attempt to change the conversation to something you're more comfortable with.

At no point did I mock the Conn shooting victims and it's pretty low for you to even suggest it. It's also similar in the way liberals throw the word racism around when they want to bring a conversation back to their terms.

Point being, you accused me of something anyone here can see I didn't do. You are now trying to reframe the 2nd Amendment as a 'hunters only' issue. What part of the 2nd Amendment do you need explained to you?

You're an utter cunt for trying to use a vile assertion like making fun of shooting victims. You know you're wrong, and like another poster on here, when your position is shown to be invalid you use bluff, demands and misdirection in an attempt to garner popular support.

Back on track: This is about gun control. We have an overwhelming amount to gun laws on the books, they should be better enforced.

People need to be better neighbors, care for each other more and get help for people who need it.

So now the name calling starts after you get called out,conversation done!

[RedskinRat]

Don't lie, you won't get called names.

You're wrong, everyone can see you're wrong. Now you compound it by being too gutless to just apologize.

Of course you're done. Crawl away.

[HailGreen28]

You know, at risk of the NRA being able to tell us what we believe, as someone here said: I thought it might be helpful to post what the NRA said, not just a liberal description of what the NRA said that was posted earlier: Link

NRA PRESS CONFERENCE
12/21/2012

The National Rifle Association's 4 million mothers, fathers, sons and daughters join the nation in horror, outrage, grief and earnest prayer for the families of Newtown, Connecticut ... who suffered such incomprehensible loss as a result of this unspeakable crime.

Out of respect for those grieving families, and until the facts are known, the NRA has refrained from comment. While some have tried to exploit tragedy for political gain, we have remained respectfully silent.

Now, we must speak ... for the safety of our nation's children. Because for all the noise and anger directed at us over the past week, no one — nobody — has addressed the most important, pressing and immediate question we face: How do we protect our children right now, starting today, in a way that we know works?

The only way to answer that question is to face up to the truth. Politicians pass laws for Gun-Free School Zones. They issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them.

And in so doing, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are their safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.

How have our nation's priorities gotten so far out of order? Think about it. We care about our money, so we protect our banks with armed guards. American airports, office buildings, power plants, courthouses — even sports stadiums — are all protected by armed security.

We care about the President, so we protect him with armed Secret Service agents. Members of Congress work in offices surrounded by armed Capitol Police officers.

Yet when it comes to the most beloved, innocent and vulnerable members of the American family — our children — we as a society leave them utterly defenseless, and the monsters and predators of this world know it and exploit it. That must change now!

(continue reading at link above)

[Giantone]

Punch It In,

Close to home.

Guns, ammunition found during Ocean Township traffic stop, police say | NJ.com