Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.Yes, taking guns from law abiding citizens is like targeting the drug war on people who don't do drugs and drunk driving programs on people who don't drink. Fact and logic, liberals take to them like fish take to cameras and fire flies
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.Yes, taking guns from law abiding citizens is like targeting the drug war on people who don't do drugs and drunk driving programs on people who don't drink. Fact and logic, liberals take to them like fish take to cameras and fire flies
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
Let's look at this logically.
Heroin is ILLEGAL in this country. Oh sure a few specialized labs can legally own heroin, but the average person on the street? It's illegal.
Yet, we have a heroin epidemic in this country with people using illegal heroin.
America's Heroin Epidemic - NBC News
How is this possible? We made heroin illegal, don't people realize they aren't supposed to own it?
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.Yes, taking guns from law abiding citizens is like targeting the drug war on people who don't do drugs and drunk driving programs on people who don't drink. Fact and logic, liberals take to them like fish take to cameras and fire flies
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
The same way the French get them...from other criminals who will smuggle them in from around the world, or they will buy them or steal them from cops and soldiers.....they are criminals.....as Harley Quinn says..that's what they do....
You know that fully automatic rifles are completely illegal in France...they have done exactly what you want to do to guns in this country......
Criminals and terrorists get fully automatic rifles easily...in fact, I posted yesterday that criminals in France use AK-47s as a status symbol...if you don't have one you are a loser......
That is what happens when you make these guns illegal.....
And you know that in Britain...they also did exactly what you want.....and their gun crime rate stayed exactly the same...and went up 4% last year...their violent crime rate went up 27%......
Japan...they did what we said we need to do.....they made possession of an illegal gun a 30 year sentence...and so far that has stopped the next Yakuza war......
You are wrong...we are right....
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...Put away your paint roller, buster. I never said borders should remain open to anyone who wants to cross them.Most are illegal but they began their lives as newly minted guns from a factory somewhere and were originally sold shiny and new in some store. That is a start.
Why is that? You're going to make 300 million guns disappear?
And it's hard to take this seriously from someone who thinks we should keep our borders open to anyone who wants to cross them ... carrying whatever they want to carry. Including ... guns ...
We can't keep pot away from high schoolers. But we're going to keep guns away from criminals, yeah.
So no, your plan to keep guns from honest citizens isn't a "start," it's a red herring
Why is WHAT? Where did I say limiting semiautomatic rifles was making "300 million guns disappear."
One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
If you somehow magically got rid of all existing guns, you haven't gotten rid of the knowledge on how to make them, or the simple tooling machines you need to make them.
If the criminals really want them, they will start making them themselves, or an industry will form up to make them.
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...Put away your paint roller, buster. I never said borders should remain open to anyone who wants to cross them.Most are illegal but they began their lives as newly minted guns from a factory somewhere and were originally sold shiny and new in some store. That is a start.
Why is that? You're going to make 300 million guns disappear?
And it's hard to take this seriously from someone who thinks we should keep our borders open to anyone who wants to cross them ... carrying whatever they want to carry. Including ... guns ...
We can't keep pot away from high schoolers. But we're going to keep guns away from criminals, yeah.
So no, your plan to keep guns from honest citizens isn't a "start," it's a red herring
Why is WHAT? Where did I say limiting semiautomatic rifles was making "300 million guns disappear."
One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
And please don't make fun of my probably not exact terminology above. I get the drift.
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
If you somehow magically got rid of all existing guns, you haven't gotten rid of the knowledge on how to make them, or the simple tooling machines you need to make them.
If the criminals really want them, they will start making them themselves, or an industry will form up to make them.
And the thing is....
There actually was a time when guns did not exist...anywhere in the world....
What was that world like.....the strong raped, murdered and enslaved the weak.....
When guns came along, that changed and the world was civilized for normal people........
What they advocate, in their uninformed way, is for a return to that brutality.....they don't even have to imagine it...Mexico shows us exactly what this is like...as did Rwanda.........and Germany......
Mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide only happen to people who don't have guns to stop it.
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...Put away your paint roller, buster. I never said borders should remain open to anyone who wants to cross them.Most are illegal but they began their lives as newly minted guns from a factory somewhere and were originally sold shiny and new in some store. That is a start.
Why is that? You're going to make 300 million guns disappear?
And it's hard to take this seriously from someone who thinks we should keep our borders open to anyone who wants to cross them ... carrying whatever they want to carry. Including ... guns ...
We can't keep pot away from high schoolers. But we're going to keep guns away from criminals, yeah.
So no, your plan to keep guns from honest citizens isn't a "start," it's a red herring
Why is WHAT? Where did I say limiting semiautomatic rifles was making "300 million guns disappear."
One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
And please don't make fun of my probably not exact terminology above. I get the drift.
How?No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.
When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
If you somehow magically got rid of all existing guns, you haven't gotten rid of the knowledge on how to make them, or the simple tooling machines you need to make them.
If the criminals really want them, they will start making them themselves, or an industry will form up to make them.
And the thing is....
There actually was a time when guns did not exist...anywhere in the world....
What was that world like.....the strong raped, murdered and enslaved the weak.....
When guns came along, that changed and the world was civilized for normal people........
What they advocate, in their uninformed way, is for a return to that brutality.....they don't even have to imagine it...Mexico shows us exactly what this is like...as did Rwanda.........and Germany......
Mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide only happen to people who don't have guns to stop it.
There is also an article out there that espouses on this concept, that the advent of robotic arms spells the end of the need of masses of infantry, and thus the end of the age of the gun. But that's another topic, although related.
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...Put away your paint roller, buster. I never said borders should remain open to anyone who wants to cross them.Most are illegal but they began their lives as newly minted guns from a factory somewhere and were originally sold shiny and new in some store. That is a start.
Why is that? You're going to make 300 million guns disappear?
And it's hard to take this seriously from someone who thinks we should keep our borders open to anyone who wants to cross them ... carrying whatever they want to carry. Including ... guns ...
We can't keep pot away from high schoolers. But we're going to keep guns away from criminals, yeah.
So no, your plan to keep guns from honest citizens isn't a "start," it's a red herring
Why is WHAT? Where did I say limiting semiautomatic rifles was making "300 million guns disappear."
One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
And please don't make fun of my probably not exact terminology above. I get the drift.
Using correct terminology IS important though because as we have seen, many of the anti gun politicians and their supporters have not just used terms that they don't even understand , but they have made up entire new terms in their crusade against guns.
I mean calling an AR15 a weapon of war, for example? Give me a break.
And the same goes for some on the right, terminology matters, an AR15 IS a assault weapon. No sense denying that.Congress of course defined the term assault weapon , that's all that term means. It doesn't actually mean a .223 caliber rifle is any more dangerous just because it is called an assault weapon by Congress.
How?When you ban guns for law abiding people who do not use them for crime.....criminals will still get them.....that is how it is all around the world.......the criminals have guns, normal people do not......
If you somehow magically got rid of all existing guns, you haven't gotten rid of the knowledge on how to make them, or the simple tooling machines you need to make them.
If the criminals really want them, they will start making them themselves, or an industry will form up to make them.
And the thing is....
There actually was a time when guns did not exist...anywhere in the world....
What was that world like.....the strong raped, murdered and enslaved the weak.....
When guns came along, that changed and the world was civilized for normal people........
What they advocate, in their uninformed way, is for a return to that brutality.....they don't even have to imagine it...Mexico shows us exactly what this is like...as did Rwanda.........and Germany......
Mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide only happen to people who don't have guns to stop it.
There is also an article out there that espouses on this concept, that the advent of robotic arms spells the end of the need of masses of infantry, and thus the end of the age of the gun. But that's another topic, although related.
They have been predicting the end of the grunts since after World War 1.......never going to happen...at least unit Skynet comes on line....
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...Put away your paint roller, buster. I never said borders should remain open to anyone who wants to cross them.Why is that? You're going to make 300 million guns disappear?
And it's hard to take this seriously from someone who thinks we should keep our borders open to anyone who wants to cross them ... carrying whatever they want to carry. Including ... guns ...
We can't keep pot away from high schoolers. But we're going to keep guns away from criminals, yeah.
So no, your plan to keep guns from honest citizens isn't a "start," it's a red herring
Why is WHAT? Where did I say limiting semiautomatic rifles was making "300 million guns disappear."
One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
And please don't make fun of my probably not exact terminology above. I get the drift.
Using correct terminology IS important though because as we have seen, many of the anti gun politicians and their supporters have not just used terms that they don't even understand , but they have made up entire new terms in their crusade against guns.
I mean calling an AR15 a weapon of war, for example? Give me a break.
And the same goes for some on the right, terminology matters, an AR15 IS a assault weapon. No sense denying that.Congress of course defined the term assault weapon , that's all that term means. It doesn't actually mean a .223 caliber rifle is any more dangerous just because it is called an assault weapon by Congress.
The main problem is the bait and switch that the anti gunners do.......that is why there is no trust when they say they simply want "common sense" gun control.........
How?
If you somehow magically got rid of all existing guns, you haven't gotten rid of the knowledge on how to make them, or the simple tooling machines you need to make them.
If the criminals really want them, they will start making them themselves, or an industry will form up to make them.
And the thing is....
There actually was a time when guns did not exist...anywhere in the world....
What was that world like.....the strong raped, murdered and enslaved the weak.....
When guns came along, that changed and the world was civilized for normal people........
What they advocate, in their uninformed way, is for a return to that brutality.....they don't even have to imagine it...Mexico shows us exactly what this is like...as did Rwanda.........and Germany......
Mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide only happen to people who don't have guns to stop it.
There is also an article out there that espouses on this concept, that the advent of robotic arms spells the end of the need of masses of infantry, and thus the end of the age of the gun. But that's another topic, although related.
They have been predicting the end of the grunts since after World War 1.......never going to happen...at least unit Skynet comes on line....
I think his main point is that before the gun, the elites used small armies of professional warriors to control the masses. With the advent of the gun and national armies, they had to placate the masses to get their armies. Now that they can replace the masses with remote controlled drones or semi-autonomous machines (a bit far fetched, I know), he surmises the elites wouldn't need to placate the masses anymore.
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...Put away your paint roller, buster. I never said borders should remain open to anyone who wants to cross them.
Why is WHAT? Where did I say limiting semiautomatic rifles was making "300 million guns disappear."
One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
And please don't make fun of my probably not exact terminology above. I get the drift.
Using correct terminology IS important though because as we have seen, many of the anti gun politicians and their supporters have not just used terms that they don't even understand , but they have made up entire new terms in their crusade against guns.
I mean calling an AR15 a weapon of war, for example? Give me a break.
And the same goes for some on the right, terminology matters, an AR15 IS a assault weapon. No sense denying that.Congress of course defined the term assault weapon , that's all that term means. It doesn't actually mean a .223 caliber rifle is any more dangerous just because it is called an assault weapon by Congress.
The main problem is the bait and switch that the anti gunners do.......that is why there is no trust when they say they simply want "common sense" gun control.........
Of course, but that is again where conservatives need to get smarter. Instead of screaming "no no no" as they have been for seven and a half fucking years every time liberals want to do something, beat them to the punch for a change.
Do you watch Oreilly? He said much the same thing to Paul Ryan a few weeks ago in regards to Kate's Law, he asked Ryan why he won't have a vote on that law when he KNOWS it would easily pass the House, Ryan's response was "because we know the Dems won't let it pass the Senate, and we know Obama will veto it if they did" Oreilly's response was "so what? Do SOMETHING, let them look like the assholes"
Same thing here, conservatives DO SOMETHING then when liberals scream "no that's not enough" THEY look like the assholes. That's something liberals have figured out very well. They suggest all sorts of stupid, outlandish bills and then when conservatives say "no , that is insane" they just stand back and say "see those damned conservatives, they are just the party of no, they don't have any ideas"
Jesus Christ man, it's OBVIOUS we need better gun control in this country. If conservatives define that better gun control it will actually mean control of who can get a gun, if liberals do so it will be more bans that don't do anything, but make people feel better.
No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.Why should it,if anything it proves how dangerous life can be.
Gun crazies want to disarm the people.what kind of logic is that?
Yes, taking guns from law abiding citizens is like targeting the drug war on people who don't do drugs and drunk driving programs on people who don't drink. Fact and logic, liberals take to them like fish take to cameras and fire flies
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
No. The point is actually that many addicts began by being prescribed opiates for a bonafide medical issue. Then they got hooked and tried "doctor shopping" and emergency room jumping to get more as their need increased. And when that no longer worked, they switched to heroin. Focusing on the root of the problem, where it started, will hopefully save the upcoming generation from a similar fate. To me, it makes equal sense that if the root of the illegal gun problem--guns in circulation--were addressed, it would help keep them from the wrong hands by the sheer weight of the numbers.But in order to keep drugs from addicts, doctors have severely limited pain prescriptions to ALL patients. And doctors and pharmacies share pain prescription information on all patients to catch those abusing them. And to limit drunk drivers, all drivers can be stopped and tested, bars can be held liable for serving to someone already three sheets to the wind, regardless of whether they're driving. To limit gun violence, perhaps guns need to be limited for all. Fair? Maybe not. Who told you life is fair? I said limited, not completely gone, btw.Why should it,if anything it proves how dangerous life can be.
Gun crazies want to disarm the people.what kind of logic is that?
Yes, taking guns from law abiding citizens is like targeting the drug war on people who don't do drugs and drunk driving programs on people who don't drink. Fact and logic, liberals take to them like fish take to cameras and fire flies
And so people buy drugs ... illegally. My point. You may have heard about that, it's been in the news ...
OK, we don't have a problem with illegal drugs in this country. We aren't getting marijuana and cocaine and other drugs imported across our open southern border, and there aren't meth labs and domestic growers here either.
The drug problem is people getting hooked on prescribed drugs. Thank you for that extremely helpful observation
Semi automatic weapons automatically pull a new bullet into the chamber each time a bullet is fired. You don't have to do anything to reset the gun to discharge. So a good semiautomatic can deliver more bullets more quickly than a pump action weapon. I know that much. I realize that most handguns are manufactured the same way these days, but the gun manufacturers can certainly convert, if it means sales...One...because when you say semi automatic...you think you know what you mean......to an anti gun politician...that means any weapon that is semi auto...including pistols....that is the bait and switch I keep posting about......
By banning semi autos.....you can lump in any weapon that fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...that means all guns.....then they can go as far as they think they can get away with.......
And please don't make fun of my probably not exact terminology above. I get the drift.
Using correct terminology IS important though because as we have seen, many of the anti gun politicians and their supporters have not just used terms that they don't even understand , but they have made up entire new terms in their crusade against guns.
I mean calling an AR15 a weapon of war, for example? Give me a break.
And the same goes for some on the right, terminology matters, an AR15 IS a assault weapon. No sense denying that.Congress of course defined the term assault weapon , that's all that term means. It doesn't actually mean a .223 caliber rifle is any more dangerous just because it is called an assault weapon by Congress.
The main problem is the bait and switch that the anti gunners do.......that is why there is no trust when they say they simply want "common sense" gun control.........
Of course, but that is again where conservatives need to get smarter. Instead of screaming "no no no" as they have been for seven and a half fucking years every time liberals want to do something, beat them to the punch for a change.
Do you watch Oreilly? He said much the same thing to Paul Ryan a few weeks ago in regards to Kate's Law, he asked Ryan why he won't have a vote on that law when he KNOWS it would easily pass the House, Ryan's response was "because we know the Dems won't let it pass the Senate, and we know Obama will veto it if they did" Oreilly's response was "so what? Do SOMETHING, let them look like the assholes"
Same thing here, conservatives DO SOMETHING then when liberals scream "no that's not enough" THEY look like the assholes. That's something liberals have figured out very well. They suggest all sorts of stupid, outlandish bills and then when conservatives say "no , that is insane" they just stand back and say "see those damned conservatives, they are just the party of no, they don't have any ideas"
Jesus Christ man, it's OBVIOUS we need better gun control in this country. If conservatives define that better gun control it will actually mean control of who can get a gun, if liberals do so it will be more bans that don't do anything, but make people feel better.
Okay....what better gun control do you want...I want longer prison sentences...that actually works...that is how Japan does it....30 years for illegal possession...but it would have to be for an actual criminal...not some nurse who accidentally brings her lawfully permitted gun into New Jersey....
That is the problem with the anti-gunners.....
