Anti Gun nuts eye disrupting NRA convention

[koshergrl]

Terrorist?

LOL

From the "guns for me and not for thee" desk commando and supposed law enforcement jack-wad.

You could have a gun, if you could pass the psychological testing necessary to be hired as a LE officer, deputy or agent. I doubt you could.

The NRA defends the right of you and other unstable persons to own firearms. They enable dangerous people to become armed, and thus support terrorists - from Columbine to yesterday*** in Fresno, we see the results.

***Hate crime is suspected after a gunman kills 3 white men in downtown Fresno

Sorry, but considering the number of cops who are wife beaters and alcoholics your fetish for pysch screening rings hollow.

The NRA supports gun bans on those mentally adjudicated as a threat to themselves or others. what they don't support is some bureaucratic wonk being able to put people on a list that removes their rights without due process.

Wanker.

What evidence do you have to support your allegation that "cops who are wife beaters and alcoholics your fetish for pysch screening rings hollow." Other than poor use of syntax, you have none. Some points to consider:

• The Psych is administered and must be passed before s/he is armed;
• A full background check is completed before the Psych;
• If the candidate has had a DUI they won't get to these ^^^ until five years have elapsed from the date of conviction;
• A crime of violence (battery for example) and any felony are immediately turned down for emplolment;
• A DUI or Domestic Violence Arrest puts the officer on the beach, and either can result in termination if convicted. If convicted and the terms of probation include a firearms prohibition the defendant will be terminated as unable to meet the MQ's

The NRA and gun shops do not have access to mental health records. That aside, what I infer from your comment is you agree, the 2nd A. Right is in fact a privilege, which can be suspended or revoked for cause.

A right is not a privilege, and can only be revoked via due process. That is the part bureaucratic desk sitting twats like you never want to get.

As for no sources...

Police Have a Much Bigger Domestic-Abuse Problem Than the NFL Does

retards like wry catcher always get tripped up on "due process"

Yup. They think that the process trumps the right, ultimately. Because through the overzealous application of "process" to protect "rights" of criminals, they violate the rights of those that are victimized by the criminals. And THAT is their aim.

 

[BULLDOG]

Then what does?

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

Then what does?

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

 

[BULLDOG]

Then what does?

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

Nothing....since the two terrorist attacks in Paris...were committed by people on government terrorist watch lists, in a country that banned military rifles, where you can't buy any military style rifles.....there aren't even gun stores or gun shows.....and these two teams of terrorists got fully automatic rifles.......and grenades, and pistols......and not one French gun law stopped them.....France has more extreme gun control than we have and terrorists got fully automatic rifles easily...
]

And the criminals in France...also get fully automatic rifles easily...in the face of extreme French gun control.

Right.A couple of automatic rifles mean the laws restricting them are useless. Typical gun nut reasoning.

No moron...what it shows is that in a country that completely bans the weapons...an entire country, with and has no access to them for normal people.....actual criminals on actual government watch lists for violent behavior...still get them...

While in this country we have about 8 million of these rifles....and yet the laws you want to ban them only effect those people who own all of those rifles legally.

Again with the tinfoil hat "THEY'RE COMING TO GET ALL OUR GINS!!!!" theory. That's right up there with chemtrails and Bigfoot.

 

[Skull Pilot]

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

 

[koshergrl]

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

Nothing....since the two terrorist attacks in Paris...were committed by people on government terrorist watch lists, in a country that banned military rifles, where you can't buy any military style rifles.....there aren't even gun stores or gun shows.....and these two teams of terrorists got fully automatic rifles.......and grenades, and pistols......and not one French gun law stopped them.....France has more extreme gun control than we have and terrorists got fully automatic rifles easily...
]

And the criminals in France...also get fully automatic rifles easily...in the face of extreme French gun control.

Right.A couple of automatic rifles mean the laws restricting them are useless. Typical gun nut reasoning.

No moron...what it shows is that in a country that completely bans the weapons...an entire country, with and has no access to them for normal people.....actual criminals on actual government watch lists for violent behavior...still get them...

While in this country we have about 8 million of these rifles....and yet the laws you want to ban them only effect those people who own all of those rifles legally.

Again with the tinfoil hat "THEY'RE COMING TO GET ALL OUR GINS!!!!" theory. That's right up there with chemtrails and Bigfoot.

They are TRYING to come get our guns.

But they will fail.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

No law has 100% compliance. Using that as a reason to oppose it is stupid. Yes, my life is in danger when some unqualified gun nut with a Rambo complex is roaming the streets armed and hoping for the chance to shoot somebody. No, not all gun owners fit that category, but there are enough to make it worthwhile to reduce those numbers.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

Nothing....since the two terrorist attacks in Paris...were committed by people on government terrorist watch lists, in a country that banned military rifles, where you can't buy any military style rifles.....there aren't even gun stores or gun shows.....and these two teams of terrorists got fully automatic rifles.......and grenades, and pistols......and not one French gun law stopped them.....France has more extreme gun control than we have and terrorists got fully automatic rifles easily...
]

And the criminals in France...also get fully automatic rifles easily...in the face of extreme French gun control.

Right.A couple of automatic rifles mean the laws restricting them are useless. Typical gun nut reasoning.

No moron...what it shows is that in a country that completely bans the weapons...an entire country, with and has no access to them for normal people.....actual criminals on actual government watch lists for violent behavior...still get them...

While in this country we have about 8 million of these rifles....and yet the laws you want to ban them only effect those people who own all of those rifles legally.

Again with the tinfoil hat "THEY'RE COMING TO GET ALL OUR GINS!!!!" theory. That's right up there with chemtrails and Bigfoot.

They are TRYING to come get our guns.

But they will fail.

Nicee tinfoil hat you got there.

 

[Skull Pilot]

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

No law has 100% compliance. Using that as a reason to oppose it is stupid. Yes, my life is in danger when some unqualified gun nut with a Rambo complex is roaming the streets armed and hoping for the chance to shoot somebody. No, not all gun owners fit that category, but there are enough to make it worthwhile to reduce those numbers.

what law did I oppose?

and FYI I don't oppose gun bans because the criminals will not heed them I oppose them because there is no reason to stop law abiding people from owning guns

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

Who said anything about a ban? I'm talking about reasonable regulation.

 

[Skull Pilot]

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

Who said anything about a ban? I'm talking about reasonable regulation.

we already have reasonable regulation and some unreasonable regulation we don't need any more

 

[2aguy]

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

people can and do own automatic weapons

Yes. A very tiny percentage do. So? What keeps bad guys from all having fully automatic weapons?

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

Nope...as the 4th Circuit court of appeals and the clinton plan to use law suits against gun makers show...they are going to take as many guns as they can get if they are not blocked by rational people......

 

[2aguy]

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

Who said anything about a ban? I'm talking about reasonable regulation.

Okay....name your reasonable regulations and how they actually work to do what you say they do.......you guys keep throwing out "reasonable regulation" are promptly shown that they are neither reasonable or workable...then you accuse us of not wanting any laws at all....

So please...let's discuss what you think are reasonable...

 

[Markle]

Just to be clear, you believe every person who hasn't been convicted of a crime should be able to be armed at all times, right?

Plus those who have not been convicted of a violent crime. IF they so chose. Why not?

 

[BULLDOG]

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

Who said anything about a ban? I'm talking about reasonable regulation.

Okay....name your reasonable regulations and how they actually work to do what you say they do.......you guys keep throwing out "reasonable regulation" are promptly shown that they are neither reasonable or workable...then you accuse us of not wanting any laws at all....

So please...let's discuss what you think are reasonable...

I already spent more time with your closed mind than you warrant. Believe what you want.

 

[Markle]

Bloomberg anti-gun groups eye disrupting NRA convention

PLEASE DO! I quite enjoy watching leftists getting beat down!

I'm not sure about doing that to an NRA convention but here's a chap that visited a biker bar and told them vegan was the way to go!

 

[Markle]

laws do not prevent criminals from committing crimes all laws do is set the punishment

the problem is our punishment isn't harsh enough

SO TRUE!

Some years back, Florida passed a strict gun crime law. Ten years if you carry a gun in the commission of a crime. Twenty if you shoot the gun but hit no one. Life if you fire the gun and hit someone. Gun crimes plummeted. Still dropping. Anyone using one is put in prison..

 

[Cellblock2429]

Just to be clear, you believe every person who hasn't been convicted of a crime should be able to be armed at all times, right?

/---- I believe they have that right as long as they are adults.

 

[BULLDOG]

Just to be clear, you believe every person who hasn't been convicted of a crime should be able to be armed at all times, right?

/---- I believe they have that right as long as they are adults.

At least you admit that it is not absolute, Reasonable restrictions are possible.

 

[2aguy]

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or wit sthhgs.

ifor

nothing.

do you really think criminals won't do something because it's illegal?

As usual, with that reasoning, there is no need for any laws.

Or with that reasoning there is no benefit to removing the rights of law abiding citizens.

That's right. That reasoning makes all laws, including all legal rights moot. Fortunately, reasonable people realize that less than 100% compliance doesn't mean that laws are useless. The example of fully automatic weapons is a perfect example of the validity of a law where non compliance by bad guys makes very little difference in overall numbers. The majority/law abiding citizens do follow the law which makes the availability of fully auto weapons to crooks negligible. The majority/law abiding citizens would follow any law preventing sales of personal guns without a background check. Crooks could still steal guns, but the availability to crooks would be greatly reduced. Of course you know that. Gun nuts main fear is the tinfoil hat theory that some imaginary list is being made to confiscate everyone's guns. There is no rational way to deal with that irrational fear.

once again you attribute your opinions to others

I never once said laws were useless I merely stated the FACT that laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes

and it seems to me you have an irrational fear that your life is actually endangered by law abiding gun owners

No law has 100% compliance. Using that as a reason to oppose it is stupid. Yes, my life is in danger when some unqualified gun nut with a Rambo complex is roaming the streets armed and hoping for the chance to shoot somebody. No, not all gun owners fit that category, but there are enough to make it worthwhile to reduce those numbers.

Except cars killed 36,000 people accidentally in 2015....and guns killed 589 people accidentally in 2015.......as more than 200 million more people bought guns ....and we went from 4.7 million people carrying guns to over 15 million people carrying guns.....

gun accidents do not match your fear or your draconian laws that you want to impose on normal gun owners.....

And again....terrorists used illegal AK-47s to attack French police today.....

Champs-Élysées‬‬ attack: 1 police officer killed, another injured in Paris shooting

We have 8 million rifles with magazines......and knives are used to murder more people each year than they are...and you are afraid of the rifle...and not knives....you have the irrational fear, not us.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just to be clear, you believe every person who hasn't been convicted of a crime should be able to be armed at all times, right?

Why not?

If they are a sane adult with no criminal history, why would you deny them basic civil rights? I mean, OTHER than the fact that you are a fascist and seek to crush rights....