All of you realize that there is no factual evidence that gun control works right?

[OODA_Loop]

All of you realize that there is no factual evidence that gun control works right?

Just as there’s no ‘factual evidence’ anyone wants to take your guns.

I believe when this administration, and/or its subsequent iterations, gets enough "factual evidence" together and they think can take your guns.

They will.

 

[blackhawk]

This maybe one of the dumbest threads to date. It's obvious the gun nuts are a rather dumb breed, but to assert there is not evidence to suggest gun control doesn't work is down to earth stupid.

The evidence is clear. No gun control doesn't work, the bodies in Newtown are clear and convincing evidence.

Another stupid remark which needs to be laughed off is the assertion that "hundreds of millions of people" will have their rights taken away. Hundreds of Millions? And what rights are those? Common sense and humanity suggest no one should have a gun unless they have been screened and earned a license. Common sense suggests no one should sell or provide a gun to anyone not screened and licensed.

I've posted elsewhere what I think and believe ought to be done to mitigate the violence; the gun nuts have shown they really don't give a second's thought to the 20-first graders murdered last month. As callous conservatives their first and only concern is how is Newtown going to effect me.

You guys on the far right are unbelievably dumb.

Despite the high opinion you seem to have of yourself this post does nothing to suggest you are on the top step of the intelligence ladder.

I don't believe I'm on the top step of any "intelligence ladder"; I can infer by your post you're several rungs and a standard deviation below me on said ladder.

Your the one who started up the childish name calling and insulting I just responded on a level you could relate to if you want to be taken serious which I doubt try not calling those you disagree with stupid and dumb.

 

[J.E.D]

GUn nutters are going to be gun nutters no matter what. The rest of us will view the world with common sense.

Take your assault weapons, semi-auto, whatever, and shoot each other to kingdom come for all I care. But leave the rest of us to live a peaceful life without your psycho bullshit. Thank you very much.

 

[OODA_Loop]

GUn nutters are going to be gun nutters no matter what. The rest of us will view the world with common sense.

Take your assault weapons, semi-auto, whatever, and shoot each other to kingdom come for all I care. But leave the rest of us to live a peaceful life without your psycho bullshit. Thank you very much.

Where do the criminals fit in ?

Answer: No where.

 

[JimH52]

Oh, so since there is NO EVIDENCE that these gun controls will save even one life, we need to back off, right? But if there is a one percent chance, why not try? Is a one percent chance of saving an innocent child's life worth the one percent.

YOU DAMN RIGHT IT IS!

 

[OODA_Loop]

Oh, so since there is NO EVIDENCE that these gun controls will save even one life, we need to back off, right? But if there is a one percent chance, why not try? Is a one percent chance of saving an innocent child's life worth the one percent.

YOU DAMN RIGHT IT IS!

Guns protect more children than they kill.

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

GUn nutters are going to be gun nutters no matter what. The rest of us will view the world with common sense.

Take your assault weapons, semi-auto, whatever, and shoot each other to kingdom come for all I care. But leave the rest of us to live a peaceful life without your psycho bullshit. Thank you very much.

YEEEEEEES, that's the way to handle a complex issue such as gun-control. TELL 'EM TO GO AWAY!

Oh, so since there is NO EVIDENCE that these gun controls will save even one life, we need to back off, right? But if there is a one percent chance, why not try? Is a one percent chance of saving an innocent child's life worth the one percent.

YOU DAMN RIGHT IT IS!

If banning something saves a single life we should go through with it, is that your logic? Hey, it sounds great on paper, but imo its a bit quixotic.
I'm all for saving lives, but if we go about that using your logic, shouldn't America ban a HUGE list of things, things like fast food, sugar, fast cars, etc etc etc? I mean, banning sugar alone would save many lives, reduce healthcare costs, and increase longevity as well as overall heath. Its just a thought

 

[mudwhistle]

So how do you "factually know" that if the assault weapons ban was in place, that one less child would have been butchered in Newtown. Do yo have a factual response? Or will you continue to scribe conjecture and your unsubstantiated opinions.

Or maybe it isn't worth a child's life? Is it?

So your goal isn't so much to prevent deaths but to reduce the body-count?


I thought the goal was to prevent deaths.

What's the point of all of these half measures?

I'll tell you what the point is, this is about taking guns from law-abiding citizens, nothing more. If Obama was really serious about protecting our kids he'd have armed guards in every school in America right dammit now.

 

[Londoner]

Like zero.

Some places with lotsa gun control have more violence and some have less.

Some places with little gun control have more violence and some have less.

It is not a fact that gun control reduces violence.


Having the desire to strip hundreds of millions of people of their rights on a whim is pretty ******* low class.

Use the Chaney "1% Iraq standard". If there is a 1% chance that increasing background checks will prevent 1 death, than it's worth it. [When the intelligence agencies said that the data didn't support taking action against Hussein, your boy Chaney created a devilish little end-around]

Having said that, you need to reign in the hysterical rhetoric. Nobody is going to take away your right to do anything. The sissy democrats are proposing minor changes RE background checks and automatic assault rifles. And nothing they propose will pass because 1/3rd of the dems are blue dogs (aka conservatives).

Son, you gotta Man Up and laugh at the meek pussies trying to enact gun laws. Don't run around like a hysterical child.

The weak dems are not even going as far as Reagan and the Brady Bill. You want to see some serious gun legislation, check out your side of the aisle. (And stop worrying so much. You've got the battle won. The opposition party doesn't exist)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn_yLWttxc4]Reagan supports the Brady Bill - YouTube[/ame]

 

[OODA_Loop]

The sissy democrats are proposing minor changes about back ground checks and automatic assault rifles.

Not automatic assualt rifles.

Semi-automatic military style assualt rifles

 

[mudwhistle]

The sissy democrats are proposing minor changes about back ground checks and automatic assault rifles.

Not automatic assualt rifles.

Semi-automatic military style assualt rifles

Not Semi-automatic military style assault rifles.

Really cool tricked out looking bang-bangs.

 

[regent]

The hope with any law is that it cuts down on a problem but few expect it to eliminate the problem. Does passing a rule in schools against cheating mean that no one cheats any longer? Does making an act a religious sin eliminate the acts? The best we can hope for with laws, rules and so forth is to cut the numbers breaking the rules.

 

[GuyPinestra]

So how do you "factually know" that if the assault weapons ban was in place, that one less child would have been butchered in Newtown. Do yo have a factual response? Or will you continue to scribe conjecture and your unsubstantiated opinions.

Or maybe it isn't worth a child's life? Is it?

How do we know anything until we try it?

My guess is conjecture will continue to reign.

It was tried from '94 to '04.

No proof that it did a lick of good.

Somehow you think it will be different THIS time?

 

[GuyPinestra]

All of you realize that there is no factual evidence that gun control works right?

Just as there’s no ‘factual evidence’ anyone wants to take your guns.

You miss the vid of Feinstein admitting her desire to confiscate weapons back in '94?

You see the Dem 'wishlist' from NY this week?

There is PLENTY of evidence, Clayton, no matter how much you claim otherwise...

 

[Clementine]

Like zero.

Some places with lotsa gun control have more violence and some have less.

Some places with little gun control have more violence and some have less.

It is not a fact that gun control reduces violence.


Having the desire to strip hundreds of millions of people of their rights on a whim is pretty ******* low class.

It's not about safety, it's about control. If a government fears an armed population, beware of that government.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Results never matter to progressives. As long as they react on their feelings for the common good and ummmm humanity. Regardless of cost or consequences.

 

[regent]

So how do you "factually know" that if the assault weapons ban was in place, that one less child would have been butchered in Newtown. Do yo have a factual response? Or will you continue to scribe conjecture and your unsubstantiated opinions.

Or maybe it isn't worth a child's life? Is it?

How do we know anything until we try it?

My guess is conjecture will continue to reign.

It was tried from '94 to '04.

No proof that it did a lick of good.

Somehow you think it will be different THIS time?

In 1993 about 580,000 crimes were committed using firearms, that number went to 347,000 by 2003.

 

[NYcarbineer]

By the logic of the OP, all background checks should be ended and all restrictions on owning machine guns should be lifted.

That is where you people are at this point.

 

[mudwhistle]

By the logic of the OP, all background checks should be ended and all restrictions on owning machine guns should be lifted.

That is where you people are at this point.

Sorry, that's a false assumption.

I'm for reasonable restrictions.

I don't go for restrictions on AR 15s just because it's popular.

I can do more damage with a shotgun.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Like zero.

Some places with lotsa gun control have more violence and some have less.

Some places with little gun control have more violence and some have less.

It is not a fact that gun control reduces violence.


Having the desire to strip hundreds of millions of people of their rights on a whim is pretty ******* low class.

Yes there is. Did you know that half the states that have gun strict gun laws have lower crime rates?