He may have been alive today if they would shut down all hardware stores.

Hey, I laid down the marker in the sand pretty clearly.

I said I was WILLING to consider the GOP, unless you idiots did something patently retarded like nominate a Mormon.

And you nominated a Mormon.

How'd that work out for you again?
Bull shit you god damn liar. back in 2011 you were bashing obama and the democrats

Yes, I was. And I still do, when it's appropriate.

But frankly, you nominated the Mormon, and I said I'd vote for Obama if you did.

Incidently, you kind of made my point. If I was bashing Obama in 2011, it means I was at least WILLING to consider a Republican. As long as he wasn't a Mormon. And you nominated the Mormon. How'd that work out again?

You voted for free shiite and you want wealth from others by taxation....thanks again moron.
 
Right, because that works so well in Britain. Instead, they have knife attacks.

Number of murders in the UK by firearm- 58

Number of murders in the USA by firearm - 8775

58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

Now, yeah, the Brits are a bit more imaginative than we are.. they developed a whole six weapons to kill people with in Clue-Do.

But the total number of murders in the UK was all of 638.
Why are their so many murders in the UK? After all they have really restrictive gun laws.
only a select few can have one

638 isn't that many murders, compared tothe 13,000 murders we have every year in this country...

That's the point. but I realize math isn't your strong point. You can barely count to the number of bullets you put in a cylinder when playing Russian Roulette.
 
qJYqA.png


Guns are clearly the preferred way to kill people.

Why? Because it's so fucking easy to kill people with guns.
 
Some claim that as many as 500,000 people were killed in Rwanda. The weapon of choice seems to have been the machete. If this were a numbers game - you lose.

The issue is whether we should rely on others for our well-being. I can accept that first responders have priority to deal with an issue, as long as I have access to a back-up plan should they be unable to respond.
 
Some claim that as many as 500,000 people were killed in Rwanda. The weapon of choice seems to have been the machete. If this were a numbers game - you lose.

The issue is whether we should rely on others for our well-being. I can accept that first responders have priority to deal with an issue, as long as I have access to a back-up plan should they be unable to respond.

Wow, that was kind of retarded...

Rwanda was a war. If we ever get to that point, your Saturday Night Special is probably not going to keep you alive.
 
Some claim that as many as 500,000 people were killed in Rwanda. The weapon of choice seems to have been the machete. If this were a numbers game - you lose.

The issue is whether we should rely on others for our well-being. I can accept that first responders have priority to deal with an issue, as long as I have access to a back-up plan should they be unable to respond.

Wow, that was kind of retarded...

Rwanda was a war. If we ever get to that point, your Saturday Night Special is probably not going to keep you alive.

That's like saying Hitler declared war of the Jews.

If we ever get to that point, your Saturday Night Special is probably not going to keep you alive.
That's why those mean evil looking black guns that you hate will come in handy.
 
Number of murders in the UK by firearm- 58

Number of murders in the USA by firearm - 8775

58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US

Now, yeah, the Brits are a bit more imaginative than we are.. they developed a whole six weapons to kill people with in Clue-Do.

But the total number of murders in the UK was all of 638.
Why are their so many murders in the UK? After all they have really restrictive gun laws.
only a select few can have one

638 isn't that many murders, compared tothe 13,000 murders we have every year in this country...

That's the point. but I realize math isn't your strong point. You can barely count to the number of bullets you put in a cylinder when playing Russian Roulette.

Hell yes 1 gun death is a lot when your country has very restrictive gun laws. The number should be 0
 
Perhaps. But what would you do with all your free time?

How about you stop being a moron?

Hey, I think that all citizens have a God given right to keep and bear shovels. If you take all the shovels away from law abiding folks, only outlaws will have them. How will we be able to protect ourselves and fend off oppressive government without our trusty shovels?

When the government starts carrying shovels to fight with I will also start carrying one. But as long as they carry firearms I'll do the same.
 
Man murdered with Shovel
Holding the weapon he'd already used to beat the man to the ground, the killer stood over his lifeless body and drove the front end of the large shovel at the man's head again and again, a police report states.
When done, he threw the shovel into the bed of his truck and left.


Read more: Man is slain with a shovel - San Antonio Express-News
This thread is in response to Bob Costas asinine retort about guns and only if they were gone people would still be alive. Well Bobby should we close all hardware stores because shovels kill also.

We need more and bigger government, more regulation. No one should be allowed to buy a weapon like a shovel, without a background check, demonstrating he can safely handle the object and presenting photo ID
 
qJYqA.png


Guns are clearly the preferred way to kill people.

Why? Because it's so fucking easy to kill people with guns.
How many of those guns used were stolen?
Washington Post: More Cops Killed by Their Own Gun Than "Straw Purchases" | The Truth About Guns

The Post states that stolen guns were used in “only” 77 police murder. So . . . 107 legal guns, 77 illegal guns, 170 unaccounted for (a big ass hole in the data), and 51 police-issued weapons. I make that 405 guns.
One possible explanation for the “missing” guns: multiple cops killed by the same gun (in 95 cases). Which guns might those be? Legal or illegal or police-issued or unknown? Where they counted twice?
Percentage-wise, I’ve got 35 percent (untraced), 20 percent (legal), 15 percent (illegal) and 10 percent (police-issue). We’re down roughly 20 percent.
I know, let’s look at the raw data! Surely the WaPo provided the actual stats. I mean, it’s only 511 data points and it’s all public information . . .
I’ll call the WaPo monday for the info. Meanwhile, I’m astounded by the number of police killed by their own guns. Well, not in absolute terms. In fact, it’s pretty amazing that there’ve only been 511 police shot in the line of duty in the last ten years. In the year 2000 alone, the FBI tallied 15,517 murders.
In any case, as our headline points out, more cops are killed by their own weapons (51) than weapons obtained by so-called “straw purchase.” Just sixteen citizens bought cop-killing firearms for a felonious friend. Sixteen out of 511. That’s a hair over three percent.
 
Some claim that as many as 500,000 people were killed in Rwanda. The weapon of choice seems to have been the machete. If this were a numbers game - you lose.

The issue is whether we should rely on others for our well-being. I can accept that first responders have priority to deal with an issue, as long as I have access to a back-up plan should they be unable to respond.

Wow, that was kind of retarded...

Rwanda was a war. If we ever get to that point, your Saturday Night Special is probably not going to keep you alive.

I grant you that it was a civil war, but much of the fighting was done by civilians using what little was available to kill their neighbors. Long simmering hatred, a spark (death of a politician) and the surprised Tutsis found themselves under attack. This was not two armies fighting in the traditional sense. It was a ruthless massacre of a civilian population.
 
It's official:

This thread has been awarded the 'Retard Thread of the Month Award'. The Retard award, the highest award for inane comparison and stupid thinking, is awarded monthly to a person of such low reason and sense, they must be extraordinarily stupid. Simple levels of stupid do not qualify for the award or it would have to be given too often. While it may seem this award is not politically correct, the rational for the award recognizes that some stupid threads far exceed the usual stupid, demonstrating a level of stupid rarely reached in even the stupidest setting. Please accept this award with our fondest wishes it is not an inheritable trait.




"So I have no peroration or clarion note on which to close. Beware the irrational, however seductive. Shun the 'transcendent' and all who invite you to subordinate or annihilate yourself. Distrust compassion; prefer dignity for yourself and others. Don't be afraid to be thought arrogant or selfish. Picture all experts as if they were mammals. Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence. Suspect your own motives, and all excuses. Do not live for others any more than you expect others to live for you." Christopher Hitchens, 'letters to a young contrarian'
 
Rwanda was a war. If we ever get to that point, your Saturday Night Special is probably not going to keep you alive.

That's like saying Hitler declared war of the Jews.

.

Tell me, without googling it, was it the Hutus or the Tutsis that started the thing...

I actually did have to look it up, and, no, it's nowhere near what the Nazis did. Both sides were involved in slaughter. The Hutus slaughtered their own in addition to the Tutsis....
 
I know but there's always hope.

That you might feel a little guilt for using a man's horrible death as a political toy? You sick SOB?

Why? You have no problem doing the same thing when it suits you. You have no problem blaming conservatives when there has been a mass shooting.
So move along troll

Go author a thread that doesn't beg for ridicule if you want serious discussion, you sad sack of shit :thup:
 
Some claim that as many as 500,000 people were killed in Rwanda. The weapon of choice seems to have been the machete. If this were a numbers game - you lose.

The issue is whether we should rely on others for our well-being. I can accept that first responders have priority to deal with an issue, as long as I have access to a back-up plan should they be unable to respond.

As Jooe B said... that was a fucking war. That wasn't individuals, that was death squads roaming and hacking people up. People going into villages and surrounding to kill as many as possible. Most people were actually killed by their neighbors.

If they had access to guns, which weren't used because they weren't as cheap(the machetes were imported in huge numbers specifically because they were cheap), the numbers might be considerably higher.
 
Last edited:
That you might feel a little guilt for using a man's horrible death as a political toy? You sick SOB?

Why? You have no problem doing the same thing when it suits you. You have no problem blaming conservatives when there has been a mass shooting.
So move along troll

Go author a thread that doesn't beg for ridicule if you want serious discussion, you sad sack of shit :thup:

If this thread or any thread is pro obama you're faggot ass will ridicule So shit stain I don't care how you ridicule the truth it just makes you look ignorant.
 
Rwanda was a war. If we ever get to that point, your Saturday Night Special is probably not going to keep you alive.

That's like saying Hitler declared war of the Jews.

.

Tell me, without googling it, was it the Hutus or the Tutsis that started the thing...

I actually did have to look it up, and, no, it's nowhere near what the Nazis did. Both sides were involved in slaughter. The Hutus slaughtered their own in addition to the Tutsis....
Extermination of a people is nothing like what hitler did?
 
It's official:

This thread has been awarded the 'Retard Thread of the Month Award'. The Retard award, the highest award for inane comparison and stupid thinking, is awarded monthly to a person of such low reason and sense, they must be extraordinarily stupid. Simple levels of stupid do not qualify for the award or it would have to be given too often. While it may seem this award is not politically correct, the rational for the award recognizes that some stupid threads far exceed the usual stupid, demonstrating a level of stupid rarely reached in even the stupidest setting. Please accept this award with our fondest wishes it is not an inheritable trait.




"So I have no peroration or clarion note on which to close. Beware the irrational, however seductive. Shun the 'transcendent' and all who invite you to subordinate or annihilate yourself. Distrust compassion; prefer dignity for yourself and others. Don't be afraid to be thought arrogant or selfish. Picture all experts as if they were mammals. Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence. Suspect your own motives, and all excuses. Do not live for others any more than you expect others to live for you." Christopher Hitchens, 'letters to a young contrarian'
This post^^^^^^^^^ wrote by a retard.
 
Why? You have no problem doing the same thing when it suits you. You have no problem blaming conservatives when there has been a mass shooting.
So move along troll

Go author a thread that doesn't beg for ridicule if you want serious discussion, you sad sack of shit :thup:

If this thread or any thread is pro obama you're faggot ass will ridicule So shit stain I don't care how you ridicule the truth it just makes you look ignorant.

Ironic post is ironic.
 

Forum List

Back
Top