Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Saying your stupid law is stupid ≠ wanting no laws at all....That's what we know as a classic straw man argument.
If you knew your head from a hole in the ground, you could've figured out that one.
I assumed that you were using the argument that laws requiring background checks don't work because people that steal guns don't submit to them.Thieves and black marketeers don't have to pass background checks, fool.
Says he who illustrates fully that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.BTW..................do you think that these politicians are aware that every vote they make is recorded on the internet, and not only that, but many people are tired of being lied to,....
What is really happening?
More than just what YOU see
Fact: Thieves and black marketeers don't have to pass background checks, fool.That's what comes form belonging to a party that doesn't believe in facts.
National Rifle Association shut out on Election Day
Making up your own polls doesn't count in the end.
So your argument is that because bad people bent on criminal intent won't respect a law then there's no point in having that law.
I suppose that's a point of view.
If you're trying to argue that background checks stop criminal acts with guns, then you're completely detached from reality.Saying your stupid law is stupid ≠ wanting no laws at all....That's what we know as a classic straw man argument.
If you knew your head from a hole in the ground, you could've figured out that one.
I sincerely apologise if I've misunderstood your position.
When you wrote;
I assumed that you were using the argument that laws requiring background checks don't work because people that steal guns don't submit to them.Thieves and black marketeers don't have to pass background checks, fool.
voting against 90% of the people will lose you voters
Thanks...I was too lazy to look for when she was up for re-election.Kelly Ayotte isn't up for reelection until 2016. Nobody is going to give a shit about this by that time, just like half the country now no longer give a shit about gun control just five months after Newtown.
Fact: Thieves and black marketeers don't have to pass background checks, fool.
So your argument is that because bad people bent on criminal intent won't respect a law then there's no point in having that law.
I suppose that's a point of view.
Are there currently laws prohibiting shooting people? Are there currently laws prohibiting felons and the insane from possessing firearms?
One more law expanding background checks to private sales is not going to do any more to prevent the next Sandy Hook than previous laws did.
It will, however, make you feel good about yourselves without having to address the real causes of homicides in the US.
There's a simple and easy answer to that:Where do the thieves get their guns from...aren't there laws against 'thievery'?So your argument is that because bad people bent on criminal intent won't respect a law then there's no point in having that law.
I suppose that's a point of view.
Are there currently laws prohibiting shooting people? Are there currently laws prohibiting felons and the insane from possessing firearms?
One more law expanding background checks to private sales is not going to do any more to prevent the next Sandy Hook than previous laws did.
It will, however, make you feel good about yourselves without having to address the real causes of homicides in the US.
Why not repeal those?
If you're trying to argue that background checks stop criminal acts with guns, then you're completely detached from reality.Saying your stupid law is stupid ≠ wanting no laws at all....That's what we know as a classic straw man argument.
If you knew your head from a hole in the ground, you could've figured out that one.
I sincerely apologise if I've misunderstood your position.
When you wrote;
I assumed that you were using the argument that laws requiring background checks don't work because people that steal guns don't submit to them.Thieves and black marketeers don't have to pass background checks, fool.
Non sequitur.So your argument is that because bad people bent on criminal intent won't respect a law then there's no point in having that law.
I suppose that's a point of view.
Are there currently laws prohibiting shooting people? Are there currently laws prohibiting felons and the insane from possessing firearms?
One more law expanding background checks to private sales is not going to do any more to prevent the next Sandy Hook than previous laws did.
It will, however, make you feel good about yourselves without having to address the real causes of homicides in the US.
Where do the thieves get their guns from...aren't there laws against 'thievery'?
Why not repeal those?
There's a simple and easy answer to that:Where do the thieves get their guns from...aren't there laws against 'thievery'?Are there currently laws prohibiting shooting people? Are there currently laws prohibiting felons and the insane from possessing firearms?
One more law expanding background checks to private sales is not going to do any more to prevent the next Sandy Hook than previous laws did.
It will, however, make you feel good about yourselves without having to address the real causes of homicides in the US.
Why not repeal those?
Criminal law exists as a means through which to punish those who commit crime, not to prevent them from committing the crime in the first place.
What is really happening?
More than just what YOU see
Can you expand? What do you see?
I find it interesting that you dismiss without comment.
None...The law is supposed to primarily be for recompense for antisocial/criminal acts, not as some sort of weird tool for social engineering.There's a simple and easy answer to that:Where do the thieves get their guns from...aren't there laws against 'thievery'?
Why not repeal those?
Criminal law exists as a means through which to punish those who commit crime, not to prevent them from committing the crime in the first place.
Fair enough, so you're saying that laws against criminal activity are no deterrent at all.
Non sequitur.Are there currently laws prohibiting shooting people? Are there currently laws prohibiting felons and the insane from possessing firearms?
One more law expanding background checks to private sales is not going to do any more to prevent the next Sandy Hook than previous laws did.
It will, however, make you feel good about yourselves without having to address the real causes of homicides in the US.
Where do the thieves get their guns from...aren't there laws against 'thievery'?
Why not repeal those?
Owning a gun is not a criminal act.
What you see is a push poll from a biased leftist source....RCP even identifies them as such.More than just what YOU see
Can you expand? What do you see?
I find it interesting that you dismiss without comment.
I see a poll that surveys a bunch of ppl vs you looking out your window and suggesting you get a clear statewide view from your pair of eyes
You confuse "prevent" with "deter".If you're trying to argue that background checks stop criminal acts with guns, then you're completely detached from reality.I sincerely apologise if I've misunderstood your position.
When you wrote;
I assumed that you were using the argument that laws requiring background checks don't work because people that steal guns don't submit to them.
I'm trying to argue that background checks will stop some criminal acts with guns...just like laws against drink driving stop some people from driving drunk.
