Doctors VS. Gun Owners

Pathetic...perhaps. But certainly not sarcasm.

To argue in favor of gun rights on the basis of statistics is to miss the point. I don't care how many "accidental" deaths result in gun ownership or how many times they're used in the commission of criminal acts. None of that is justification to deny the "people" the fundamental right to bear arms to defend themselves against a government gone tyrannical. That is what the Second Amendment is all about. It's not about hunting. It's not about guns being less hazardous than doctors, automobiles or anything else for that matter. When you make the debate about any of those things, you're playing right into the hands of the "liberals" you detest so much.

I disagree. When liberals want to SUE gun manufacturers, then obviously they don't care about the human element, or the accident element, which both are relevant when discussing fatalities. Liberals simply want to disarm America, and repeal the second amendment.
 
Conveniently edited.

You do realize anyone can go back read what I actally posted, right?

What's your next trick?

I never changed what "YOU" said, and that was enough to illustrate you said exactly what you claimed you didn't say.

Get real.
 
I never changed what "YOU" said, and that was enough to illustrate you said exactly what you claimed you didn't say.

Get real.

I think your big problem is reading comprehension. Go back and read the thread a few times and maybe you'll see that Loki is correct and you are not.

I won't even bring up the idiocy of correlating gun death to death by doctor's mistake because I know it keeps assholes like you frothing at the mouth and voting.
 
I think your big problem is reading comprehension. Go back and read the thread a few times and maybe you'll see that Loki is correct and you are not.

I won't even bring up the idiocy of correlating gun death to death by doctor's mistake because I know it keeps assholes like you frothing at the mouth and voting.

Just wondering...

If a Doctor accidently shoots you, does that count as an iatrogenic or a gun related mishap?

Now, this may sting a little BANG!!
 
I think your big problem is reading comprehension. Go back and read the thread a few times and maybe you'll see that Loki is correct and you are not.

I won't even bring up the idiocy of correlating gun death to death by doctor's mistake because I know it keeps assholes like you frothing at the mouth and voting.

Man.. Haven't you turned in to the bitter little bitch.. What happened to the whining "why are you picking on me" mentality you used to display?
 
Hmmmm?

Who's the more bitter bitch? The bitter bitch or the bitter bitch that bitterly bitches about the bitter bitch with a frequency and tenacity of purpose that rises to the level of an OCD? :eusa_think:
 
Now that the "accident" argument has been removed from the gun-control crowd, next is the "saving only one lif, then it's worth it" argument.

Could you point out where I said "accident" was removed from the OP--I must have missed it.

I think your big problem is reading comprehension. Go back and read the thread a few times and maybe you'll see that Loki is correct and you are not.
I think your loyalty is making you out to be just as big of a lying back peddler as Loki is. Nice... a two'fer... :lol:

I won't even bring up the idiocy of correlating gun death to death by doctor's mistake because I know it keeps assholes like you frothing at the mouth and voting.
You condem the comparison as "idiocy" without as much of a mention as to "why." Kinda makes you out to be nothing more than another garden variety, opinion based, name calling, liberal that can't debate their way out of a wet paper bag.

I win. Now take a hike shit for brains.
 
Read it again.

It's got nothing to do with loyalty to Loki, who is actually on your side on this. You seem to be too much of a moron to understand that.
 
I know I've slapped the liberals in the face with the kind of logic they can't dispute when the only thing they can muster in response is some lame ass sarcasm.

Since 1960, 1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns.
 
Since 1960, 1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns.

Wrong, since 1960, 1,000,000 Americans have been killed by PEOPLE with guns. Big difference. Guns are non-living and incapable of operating without humans.... Guns are no more responsible for the death of another human than a kitchen knife would be. People are killed with ice-picks, shovels, knives, poison, cars, doctors, etc... Many things should be outlawed by using your logic.
 
Wrong, since 1960, 1,000,000 Americans have been killed by PEOPLE with guns. Big difference. Guns are non-living and incapable of operating without humans.... Guns are no more responsible for the death of another human than a kitchen knife would be. People are killed with ice-picks, shovels, knives, poison, cars, doctors, etc... Many things should be outlawed by using your logic.

I’m just wondering. Do you feel the same way about pornography?
There are just films, paper, or digits on a computer screen.
 
Wrong, since 1960, 1,000,000 Americans have been killed by PEOPLE with guns. Big difference. Guns are non-living and incapable of operating without humans.... Guns are no more responsible for the death of another human than a kitchen knife would be. People are killed with ice-picks, shovels, knives, poison, cars, doctors, etc... Many things should be outlawed by using your logic.

The people responsible for the killing are people like you. By voting for pro-gun politicians, you help to get guns into the hands of people who want to kill their spouses, criminals who want to commit violent crimes, and depressed teenagers who want to kill themselves.
 
I’m just wondering. Do you feel the same way about pornography?
There are just films, paper, or digits on a computer screen.

Well, personally, I don't morally or religiously agree with pornography....but you can't place that in the same category. First of all, I'm not entirely sure anyone has ever died as a direct cause from pornography. If they have, then the numbers are certainly not as high as malpractice from doctors, accidents from cars, murder rates, etc...

Second of all, guns don't kill people. A gun is incapable of using itself. If someone wants to kill you, they'll find a way. If a gun is not available, they can sit across the street and hit you with a compound hunting bow and achieve just as much damage. They can hide in your closet and wait til you go to sleep and then slit your throat with a knife. To be completely honest, I wonder what kind of extremely brutal killing techinques would have evolved from medeival times had the gun not been invented. People used to stretch people apart, impale them on steaks, burn them to death, put them in boxes with spikes, behead them....could you imagine the brutal and gorey crimes you would have had guns not been invented? I personally think the gun slowly put an end to the majority of brutal killings. I'll agree that guns make it easier to kill, however, would you rather be shot and killed instantly, or stabbed 30 times and left to bleed out? Or hung by your feet and whipped with a spike-tipped whip?
 
Hmmmm?

Who's the more bitter bitch? The bitter bitch or the bitter bitch that bitterly bitches about the bitter bitch with a frequency and tenacity of purpose that rises to the level of an OCD? :eusa_think:

Why don't you go back to sitting this one out, puppy?
 

Forum List

Back
Top