Who needs an assault rifle?

[eflatminor]

eflat. You need to get in tune. You don't bring much to the debate when you're flat like that. You are out of key.

Yes, when all else fails, launch an ad hominem attack. Works every time...

But it is cool. You can't back up the claim either. 6000 or 4000 a day.

Actually, I cited the source of the study. Reading comprehension issues?

But how easy to just blame the lack of reporting on the MSM

I did no such thing. Lie much? I simply stated the fact that the media tends not to report such things. They don't want the story of the family saved, they want the story of the family lost. It's the nature of the news business.

Sure dude that's the problem, the MSM, Not your numbers. just them damn MSM people. Of course I can't find any substantial (4000 to 6000 a day) numbers on FOX either. How come?

God forbid you might have to go to a library. You know, read a book.

 

[zeke]

Who says they are facts?

A gun is used in self defense about 2.5 million times a year.

Then that is 2.5 million times a year that an Obama voter is denied their right to "get their fair share" by force...

People who don't want to be robbed, raped, or murdered are just selfish. We have to think like leftists.

Oh fuk you. Is that all you got? Just a bunch of bullshit? Gun nutters have the critical thinking skills of a stump.

 

[eflatminor]

Damn and I thought I was blaming the fact he could so easily buy a weapon from a private seller when he would not have been able to pass a background check. Did you on purpose miss that point?

He did try a couple other methods to kill himself. Car exhaust. Running his car into a tree. Greatly disturbed individual. Are you not glad that a fuker this crazy could by a weapon with no problems. Sure you're glad. Why? Because it don't have anything to do with you.

The point is he got a firearm DESPITE the regulations and no new regulation is going to change that. Just as is the case in Japan, even if you could confiscate all the firearms, he would still be able to kill himself. So he used a firearm? So what?

Should we require background checks to buy and plant a tree? I mean, he did try to kill himself with one!

Lastly, no body is "glad". Your words, not mine.

You miss out on a lot don't you. There is no background check in the state of Ohio for private gun sales. WTF are you talking about? If the private seller had to face any consequences for selling a weapon to someone that couldn't pass a back ground check, I can pretty well assure you he couldn't have bought a weapon from that source.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And he would have simply gone to another source. The exhaust fumes didn't work. The tree didn't work. But a background check would have stopped him? You're insane.

You think every "private seller" is going to obey your rules and regulations? Are you one of those people that think criminals will obey the law?

Even in countries with virtual bans on civilian gun ownership, we still see murders, mass killings and suicides...but background checks in America are going to make a difference? Get your head out of the clouds and deal in reality.

 

[thanatos144]

Who says they are facts?

A gun is used in self defense about 2.5 million times a year.

Then that is 2.5 million times a year that an Obama voter is denied their right to "get their fair share" by force...

People who don't want to be robbed, raped, or murdered are just selfish. We have to think like leftists.

Oh fuk you. Is that all you got? Just a bunch of bullshit? Gun nutters have the critical thinking skills of a stump.

prove him wrong

 

[thanatos144]

The point is he got a firearm DESPITE the regulations and no new regulation is going to change that. Just as is the case in Japan, even if you could confiscate all the firearms, he would still be able to kill himself. So he used a firearm? So what?

Should we require background checks to buy and plant a tree? I mean, he did try to kill himself with one!

Lastly, no body is "glad". Your words, not mine.

You miss out on a lot don't you. There is no background check in the state of Ohio for private gun sales. WTF are you talking about? If the private seller had to face any consequences for selling a weapon to someone that couldn't pass a back ground check, I can pretty well assure you he couldn't have bought a weapon from that source.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And he would have simply gone to another source. The exhaust fumes didn't work. The tree didn't work. But a background check would have stopped him? You're insane.

You think every "private seller" is going to obey your rules and regulations? Are you one of those people that think criminals will obey the law?

Even in countries with virtual bans on civilian gun ownership, we still see murders, mass killings and suicides...but background checks in America are going to make a difference? Get your head out of the clouds and deal in reality.

The goal is to know who has a gun not to make things safer.

 

[zeke]

eflat. You need to get in tune. You don't bring much to the debate when you're flat like that. You are out of key.

Yes, when all else fails, launch an ad hominem attack. Works every time...

But it is cool. You can't back up the claim either. 6000 or 4000 a day.

Actually, I cited the source of the study. Reading comprehension issues?

But how easy to just blame the lack of reporting on the MSM

I did no such thing. Lie much? I simply stated the fact that the media tends not to report such things. They don't want the story of the family saved, they want the story of the family lost. It's the nature of the news business.

Sure dude that's the problem, the MSM, Not your numbers. just them damn MSM people. Of course I can't find any substantial (4000 to 6000 a day) numbers on FOX either. How come?

God forbid you might have to go to a library. You know, read a book.

Listen, make this easy. Go to your local on line newpaper and find the story about the homeowner that stopped a crime yesterday. I mean there had to be thousands of crimes stopped just yesterday across the country. Someone had to have done that in your area. I want to read about it. Link it up. Should be easy.


And I read the study. You might want to do the same. Then you might (but I doubt it) read some of the info out there that shows it was a faulty study. But don't let anything like a fact get in the way of what you want to believe.

One thing I know for sure. I have owned guns and houses for 35 years. And I have yet to stop a crime with my gun. Not one. Nor have any of the people I know with guns stopped a crime with their gun. Guess we are just lucky to live in a better area, cause the rest of you must live in a war zone. 4000 to 6000 crimes a day stopped by individuals with guns.

Sure there are.

 

[Bigfoot]

Yea the way I figure it, if you won't consent to a background check then you are hiding something that would keep you from owning a gun.

What you all hiding?

Buddy of mine got the gun he used to kill himself with from a private seller. This guy had a domestic violence charge against him and couldn't pass a background check. Got his gun though. But he only owned it a couple days before he was dead.

And your buddy would be somehow less dead if he had hung or cut himself?

He picked a more efficient means to kill himself...and you blame the firearm? How about a modicum of common sense here?

The Japanese have virtually no civilian firearm ownership, yet their suicide rate astronomical. Are their citizens somehow less dead because they didn't use a gun to off themselves?

Damn and I thought I was blaming the fact he could so easily buy a weapon from a private seller when he would not have been able to pass a background check. Did you on purpose miss that point?

He did try a couple other methods to kill himself. Car exhaust. Running his car into a tree. Greatly disturbed individual. Are you not glad that a fuker this crazy could by a weapon with no problems. Sure you're glad. Why? Because it don't have anything to do with you.

I think that you are full of manure. Partisan hacking.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Your source is a cartoon and your hatred for the second amendment is duly noted.

Why not?

He gets his news from a comedy show, why shouldn't a cartoon be the source of his opinions?

 

[eflatminor]

eflat. You need to get in tune. You don't bring much to the debate when you're flat like that. You are out of key.

Yes, when all else fails, launch an ad hominem attack. Works every time...



Actually, I cited the source of the study. Reading comprehension issues?



I did no such thing. Lie much? I simply stated the fact that the media tends not to report such things. They don't want the story of the family saved, they want the story of the family lost. It's the nature of the news business.

Sure dude that's the problem, the MSM, Not your numbers. just them damn MSM people. Of course I can't find any substantial (4000 to 6000 a day) numbers on FOX either. How come?

God forbid you might have to go to a library. You know, read a book.

Listen, make this easy. Go to your local on line newpaper and find the story about the homeowner that stopped a crime yesterday. I mean there had to be thousands of crimes stopped just yesterday across the country. Someone had to have done that in your area. I want to read about it. Link it up. Should be easy.

Cleveland, OH Homeowner Shoots, Captures Intruder Who Attacked Him | Guns Save Lives

And I read the study. You might want to do the same. Then you might (but I doubt it) read some of the info out there that shows it was a faulty study. But don't let anything like a fact get in the way of what you want to believe.

I read those "studies" too. None have debunked the original.

One thing I know for sure. I have owned guns and houses for 35 years. And I have yet to stop a crime with my gun. Not one. Nor have any of the people I know with guns stopped a crime with their gun.

I have, more than once.

Guess we are just lucky to live in a better area, cause the rest of you must live in a war zone. 4000 to 6000 crimes a day stopped by individuals with guns.

Sure there are

Yes, there are.

 

[zeke]

And your buddy would be somehow less dead if he had hung or cut himself?

He picked a more efficient means to kill himself...and you blame the firearm? How about a modicum of common sense here?

The Japanese have virtually no civilian firearm ownership, yet their suicide rate astronomical. Are their citizens somehow less dead because they didn't use a gun to off themselves?

Damn and I thought I was blaming the fact he could so easily buy a weapon from a private seller when he would not have been able to pass a background check. Did you on purpose miss that point?

He did try a couple other methods to kill himself. Car exhaust. Running his car into a tree. Greatly disturbed individual. Are you not glad that a fuker this crazy could by a weapon with no problems. Sure you're glad. Why? Because it don't have anything to do with you.

I think that you are full of manure. Partisan hacking.

Hey hey what a weird fuker you are. Next thing, come out and claim that gun suicides are all made up by the MSM to take away your guns. And whether you believe me or not, guess what, doesn't change a single fact that I wrote about how my friend got the gun that he killed himself with. What you think or don't think means nothing.

 

[Bigfoot]

What you think or don't think means nothing.

Just like your posts.

 

[zeke]

Yes, when all else fails, launch an ad hominem attack. Works every time...



Actually, I cited the source of the study. Reading comprehension issues?



I did no such thing. Lie much? I simply stated the fact that the media tends not to report such things. They don't want the story of the family saved, they want the story of the family lost. It's the nature of the news business.



God forbid you might have to go to a library. You know, read a book.

Listen, make this easy. Go to your local on line newpaper and find the story about the homeowner that stopped a crime yesterday. I mean there had to be thousands of crimes stopped just yesterday across the country. Someone had to have done that in your area. I want to read about it. Link it up. Should be easy.

Cleveland, OH Homeowner Shoots, Captures Intruder Who Attacked Him | Guns Save Lives



I read those "studies" too. None have debunked the original.

One thing I know for sure. I have owned guns and houses for 35 years. And I have yet to stop a crime with my gun. Not one. Nor have any of the people I know with guns stopped a crime with their gun.

I have, more than once.

Guess we are just lucky to live in a better area, cause the rest of you must live in a war zone. 4000 to 6000 crimes a day stopped by individuals with guns.

Sure there are

Yes, there are.

Prove what you say or stfu. This is tiresome. And should be easy. The only thing you got is a faulty study from 23 years ago. WTF is wrong that you can't come up with hundreds of examples every day? That is what YOUR numbers say is happening each and every day.
Prove your actual numbers. Not what some dude says he thinks is happening.

 

[Koios]

Listen, make this easy. Go to your local on line newpaper and find the story about the homeowner that stopped a crime yesterday. I mean there had to be thousands of crimes stopped just yesterday across the country. Someone had to have done that in your area. I want to read about it. Link it up. Should be easy.

Cleveland, OH Homeowner Shoots, Captures Intruder Who Attacked Him | Guns Save Lives



I read those "studies" too. None have debunked the original.



I have, more than once.

Guess we are just lucky to live in a better area, cause the rest of you must live in a war zone. 4000 to 6000 crimes a day stopped by individuals with guns.

Sure there are

Yes, there are.

Prove what you say or stfu. This is tiresome. And should be easy. The only thing you got is a faulty study from 23 years ago. WTF is wrong that you can't come up with hundreds of examples every day? That is what YOUR numbers say is happening each and every day.
Prove your actual numbers. Not what some dude says he thinks is happening.

They're obviously not actual. And in fact, as wild guesses go it's pretty-much a whopper, with a range as broad as 2000 per day, from a base guess of 4000 per day. Anyone who's done statistical analysis would laugh their ass off (I did.).

Now for an example of something "actual:"

FASTSTATS - Homicide

Note: 16,259, which indeed would appear to be an actual number, which can be further validated by going deeper into the minutia, which is available with supporting links to tabular data, which itself is source-referenced.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Who Needs an Assault Rifle?" - YouTube

Serial killers, for one. Can you imagine going into a movie theater with a single action revolver. Hell, in the time it takes to pull back the hammer for the second kill all of your targets will be on the move. How frustrating is that.

Yeah, the fact that Holmes had nerve gas (Ricin) grenades in his apartment is no indication that he would have lobbed them - magnifying the death count several hundred times. Had Holmes used the Ricin, every person in the theater COMPLEX would have died, many a slow, lingering death.

But you Bolsheviks are confident that the guns, rather than Holmes were responsible for the Aurora massacre.

James Holmes' home boobytrapped: Colorado shooting suspect's home had 30 homemade grenades, PD says

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just a hypothetical for the gun grabbers.

A bad guy broke into my house and, since he didn't obey the law, he had a 30 round magazine in his AR-15. Since I am the good guy and I do obey the law, I only had two ten round magazines, taped together that I can switch in 2 seconds when the first one is empty.

After we exchanged 20 shots each, and missed, I was out of ammo and the bad guy still had 10 rounds. Who won this fight and why?

Obama; because criminals vote their own interests. Had the criminal died, Obama would have lost a vote. This way it works out for the left.

 

[Koios]

Just a hypothetical for the gun grabbers.

A bad guy broke into my house and, since he didn't obey the law, he had a 30 round magazine in his AR-15. Since I am the good guy and I do obey the law, I only had two ten round magazines, taped together that I can switch in 2 seconds when the first one is empty.

After we exchanged 20 shots each, and missed, I was out of ammo and the bad guy still had 10 rounds. Who won this fight and why?

Obama; because criminals vote their own interests. Had the criminal died, Obama would have lost a vote. This way it works out for the left.

If only books on voting rights (how criminals often lose them) were picturebooks. *Sigh*

Maybe then you could learn shit.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Or they can use a bomb.

America's first notorious mass murder involved locking the doors of a theater and burning it down with everyone inside. H.H. Homes in 1822, Boston.

But the Bolsheviks don't care. Wry doesn't give a flying fuck about who is killed, like all of the left this is just a vehicle for him to promote the disarming of the peasantry.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Oh fuk you. Is that all you got? Just a bunch of bullshit? Gun nutters have the critical thinking skills of a stump.

Isn't that the issue, Zeke? That those who use guns to protect themselves are just being selfish?

The obsession of the left to disarm the peasantry has nothing to do with making the peasants safer - quite the opposite.

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, that could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it."

Alexander Hamilton, "Concerning the Militia," 29 Federalist Daily Advertiser, January 10, 1788:

 

[Uncensored2008]

They're obviously not actual. And in fact, as wild guesses go it's pretty-much a whopper, with a range as broad as 2000 per day, from a base guess of 4000 per day. Anyone who's done statistical analysis would laugh their ass off (I did.).

Now for an example of something "actual:"

FASTSTATS - Homicide

Note: 16,259, which indeed would appear to be an actual number, which can be further validated by going deeper into the minutia, which is available with supporting links to tabular data, which itself is source-referenced.

Pssst, Comrade Fucktard; not every crime stopped is a homicide...

Many times, just the presence of a shotgun behind the bar, or a Glock on the belt of the store clerk, is enough to deter a criminal.

I suspect you are just working to America safer, for criminals...

 

[Uncensored2008]

If only books on voting rights (how criminals often lose them) were picturebooks. *Sigh*

Maybe then you could learn shit.

Comrade Fucktard, CONVICTS often lose rights while incarcerated. Since most criminals get away with their crimes, claiming that criminals lose rights is mind-numbingly stupid. downright leftist-stupid.