Attention, gun control supporters:

[daveman]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

Screw that illogical question.

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of assault type, rapid fire, military style weapons which have no useful purpose other than to kill humans.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of extended capacity magazines for any kind of semi automatic weapon. Put a high tax on any ammunition and treat it just like the sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol........for starters.

Only the Right Wingers, criminals and the insane want to do nothing.......oh, I forgot the NRA.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

Screw that illogical question.

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of assault type, rapid fire, military style weapons which have no useful purpose other than to kill humans.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of extended capacity magazines for any kind of semi automatic weapon. Put a high tax on any ammunition and treat it just like the sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol........for starters.

Only the Right Wingers, criminals and the insane want to do nothing.......oh, I forgot the NRA.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

Just tell him he Can't Understand Normal Thinking
and be done with it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

irrelevant you posted inaccurate numbers and your source left out two years.

Numbers were accurate, and frankly, I'd rather have Australia's murder rate than ours...

They haven't had a mass shooting since the gun ban was imposed.

Here are the numbers that you posted

2009: 30
2008: 19
2007: 25
2006: 29
2005: 40
2004: 32
2003: 54
2002: 45
2001: 47
2000: 57
1999: 50
1998: 57
1997: 79
1996: 104

Here are the numbers from your link that I posted

2010: 231
2009: 224
2008: 225
2007: 404
2006: 229
2003: 287
Plus your source left out 2004 and 2005 in the total number of gun deaths section.
That is dishonest on your part and post inaccurate numbers.

 

[GuyPinestra]

From your link
Very dishonest of you.
2010: 231
2009: 224
2008: 225
2007: 404
2006: 229
2003: 287
Your source left out 2004 and 2005 in the total number of gun deaths section.

if you go back to the same source, the homicide rate in 1992 (when they instituted the ban) was 331, and the homicide rate dropped from 1.9 to 1.2 (Australia has had an influx of new immigration in recent years.)

In short, guns bans did cause the murder rate to drop... although there never was that high of a murder rate in Oz to start with.

Now, compare with the US... Where we have a 4.6 homicide rate compared to Australia's 1.2.

Or 14159 homicides compared to their 262.

They just don't get it. There's no need for semi automatic weapons with 30 clips which are designed to kill people and nothing else. In every one of the mass killings someone with an automatic pistol and an ordinary shell capacity would have killed two or three unless he was an expert marksman. That's the truth.

You. are. delusional.

In 80% of the mass murders NO rifle was used, only semi-automatic pistols and MULTIPLE magazines. 10 and 15 shot magazines, NOT 30's.

THAT is the truth, Cammmpbell, as inconvenient as it may be.

 

[JoeB131]

irrelevant you posted inaccurate numbers and your source left out two years.

Numbers were accurate, and frankly, I'd rather have Australia's murder rate than ours...

They haven't had a mass shooting since the gun ban was imposed.

Here are the numbers that you posted

2009: 30
2008: 19
2007: 25
2006: 29
2005: 40
2004: 32
2003: 54
2002: 45
2001: 47
2000: 57
1999: 50
1998: 57
1997: 79
1996: 104

Here are the numbers from your link that I posted

2010: 231
2009: 224
2008: 225
2007: 404
2006: 229
2003: 287
Plus your source left out 2004 and 2005 in the total number of gun deaths section.
That is dishonest on your part and post inaccurate numbers.

Does math confuse you, guy?

There first batch of numbers was gun deaths. The second batch is TOTAL homicides by all causes.

Fact was, both numbers dropped signifigantly after Australia restricted gun ownership and bought back a lot of the guns that were out there. Their murder rate is about a third of what ours is...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Numbers were accurate, and frankly, I'd rather have Australia's murder rate than ours...

They haven't had a mass shooting since the gun ban was imposed.

Here are the numbers that you posted

2009: 30
2008: 19
2007: 25
2006: 29
2005: 40
2004: 32
2003: 54
2002: 45
2001: 47
2000: 57
1999: 50
1998: 57
1997: 79
1996: 104

Here are the numbers from your link that I posted

2010: 231
2009: 224
2008: 225
2007: 404
2006: 229
2003: 287
Plus your source left out 2004 and 2005 in the total number of gun deaths section.
That is dishonest on your part and post inaccurate numbers.

Does math confuse you, guy?

There first batch of numbers was gun deaths. The second batch is TOTAL homicides by all causes.

Fact was, both numbers dropped signifigantly after Australia restricted gun ownership and bought back a lot of the guns that were out there. Their murder rate is about a third of what ours is...

You do not read or comprehend very well. I said the numbers came from the total number of gun deaths section. not total number of homicides. That section was dealing with gun deaths ONLY.

 

[JoeB131]

You do not read or comprehend very well. I said the numbers came from the total number of gun deaths section. not total number of homicides. That section was dealing with gun deaths ONLY.

You need to go back to the source, and CAREFULLY read what the numbers mean.

And then get someone to help you with the big words, Cleetus...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You do not read or comprehend very well. I said the numbers came from the total number of gun deaths section. not total number of homicides. That section was dealing with gun deaths ONLY.

You need to go back to the source, and CAREFULLY read what the numbers mean.

And then get someone to help you with the big words, Cleetus...

I posted what you posted your numbers do not match the numbers I took from your source and your source also did not show any data for 2004 and 2005.
So shut the **** up.

 

[Bfgrn]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

Screw that illogical question.

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of assault type, rapid fire, military style weapons which have no useful purpose other than to kill humans.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of extended capacity magazines for any kind of semi automatic weapon. Put a high tax on any ammunition and treat it just like the sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol........for starters.

Only the Right Wingers, criminals and the insane want to do nothing.......oh, I forgot the NRA.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Screw that illogical question.

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of assault type, rapid fire, military style weapons which have no useful purpose other than to kill humans.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of extended capacity magazines for any kind of semi automatic weapon. Put a high tax on any ammunition and treat it just like the sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol........for starters.

Only the Right Wingers, criminals and the insane want to do nothing.......oh, I forgot the NRA.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

The problem lies with the FACT that almost all of your proposals don't do a damned thing to stop criminals and the mentally ill.

Come up with something other than a destined to fail, feel good gun ban and you might get a little traction.

 

[The Rabbi]

Seven years in the gun business have taught me that restrictions have no effect at all on people's ability to acquire firearms.

 

[Bfgrn]

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

The problem lies with the FACT that almost all of your proposals don't do a damned thing to stop criminals and the mentally ill.

Come up with something other than a destined to fail, feel good gun ban and you might get a little traction.

There is plenty of rational and reasonable proposals out there. But, when you immediately turn around and dismiss it as 'a destined to fail, feel good gun ban', we are right back to where we started... the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

The problem lies with the FACT that almost all of your proposals don't do a damned thing to stop criminals and the mentally ill.

Come up with something other than a destined to fail, feel good gun ban and you might get a little traction.

There is plenty of rational and reasonable proposals out there. But, when you immediately turn around and dismiss it as 'a destined to fail, feel good gun ban', we are right back to where we started... the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Name a few, if you can, and tell us how they will work.

How do you stop criminals and the mentally ill from getting guns?

 

[daveman]

Screw that illogical question.

So, you have no rational answer. Not at all surprising.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of assault type, rapid fire, military style weapons which have no useful purpose other than to kill humans.

Stop the manufacturing and sales of extended capacity magazines for any kind of semi automatic weapon. Put a high tax on any ammunition and treat it just like the sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol........for starters.

Only the Right Wingers, criminals and the insane want to do nothing.......oh, I forgot the NRA.

The manufacture and sale of methamphetimine, cocaine, LSD, and heroin are illegal.

But you can still get them.

The search for rational answers continues...

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

Of course I'm looking for rational answers. Perhaps you can explain this dichotomy:

1. We need more laws to keep guns out of the hands on criminals.

2. We know criminals do not obey the law.

 

[daveman]

Are you really looking for rational dave? It seems you are looking for a way to use the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

Rational people in a society try to write laws that limit the damage that can be inflicted on society, without severely limiting the rights and privileges we all covet and enjoy.

The right to bear arms SHOULD be afforded to every law abiding citizen. But we should all be in favor of passing laws to prevent someone who is not a law abiding citizen from gaining access to a firearm.

We have laws that make it illegal for a minor to drive a car. When you are old enough to drive, you have to pass a written test showing you understand the rules of the road. And you have to pass a road test to show you can safely operate a motor vehicle. But even after you meet all those requirements, we still have speed limits. We still have laws that make it a crime to drink and drive.

I anticipate you will argue that driving is a privilege and owning a firearm is a right. But no right is absolute. If the 2nd amendment were absolute, then criminals, and the mentally ill should be eligible...they are NOT, nor should they be eligible.

The problem lies with the FACT that almost all of your proposals don't do a damned thing to stop criminals and the mentally ill.

Come up with something other than a destined to fail, feel good gun ban and you might get a little traction.

There is plenty of rational and reasonable proposals out there. But, when you immediately turn around and dismiss it as 'a destined to fail, feel good gun ban', we are right back to where we started... the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

The first AR ban didn't work. Why would another?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The problem lies with the FACT that almost all of your proposals don't do a damned thing to stop criminals and the mentally ill.

Come up with something other than a destined to fail, feel good gun ban and you might get a little traction.

There is plenty of rational and reasonable proposals out there. But, when you immediately turn around and dismiss it as 'a destined to fail, feel good gun ban', we are right back to where we started... the absurd, the law of the jungle, anarchy and the paranoid slippery slope to avoid the rational.

The first AR ban didn't work. Why would another?

Because it's obama he can even lower the ocean waters. Come on Dave get with the program we may have to send you to the reprogramming fema camp.

 

[JoeB131]

Seven years in the gun business have taught me that restrictions have no effect at all on people's ability to acquire firearms.

I'll be Pushers have the same attitudes about drugs and Pimps have the same attitudes about prostitution.

"It's hard to get a man to understand a problem if his salary depends on his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair.

 

[Cammmpbell]

irrelevant you posted inaccurate numbers and your source left out two years.

Numbers were accurate, and frankly, I'd rather have Australia's murder rate than ours...

They haven't had a mass shooting since the gun ban was imposed.

And the problem isn't that anyone is suggesting a complete ban...just the totally unnecessary military style weapons which are only designed for one purpose....to kill humans.

 

[eflatminor]

I'd rather have Australia's murder rate than ours...

They haven't had a mass shooting since the gun ban was imposed.

Well, that's a lie.

Monash University shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JoeB131]

I'd rather have Australia's murder rate than ours...

They haven't had a mass shooting since the gun ban was imposed.

Well, that's a lie.

Monash University shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry, man, two dead is not a mass shooting. The fact is, because he was limited to pistols, he was only able to kill two people before being subdued.