Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I disagree. Americans have shown they are not mature enough to allow the 2nd to stand.
Really? 99.999 percent of the gun owners never commit a crime. There is a proven 8% of the criminal population that commits 80% of the violent crime. So you think it is correct to penalize 90 million people for the actions of less than 100,000? You're a fool.
Those who own, have in their custody and control a gun, kill innocent people, sometimes in mass. I think that's a problem. 99.999999% of people with a mental illness do not kill people with guns, yet the NRA and its members want to single them out as the problem. How many of 99.999% of gun owners are drunks, drug addicts, wife beaters and suffer from mental illness?
99.999999% of criminals never kill anyone, yet the NRA and its members want to deprive them of their 2nd A Rights.
The policy of the NRA, no control, no way, enables the 00000.1% who should never own or possess a gun to get one.
Now you're simply lying. The NRA is all for PEOPLE control. We have ample evidence that the only people affected by gun control laws are the law abiding. We know this. France has every anti gun law you want and they had a single mass shooting that killed more people than all of the mass shootings in the USA over the last 15 years. Add in Norway, another wry catcher approved country and between the two of them you have more unfortunate people killed than have been killed in the USA in over 20 years.
So, your gun control don't work dude. The NRA says if you use a gun to commit a crime you go to prison. In the US legal system the use a gun go to jail laws are the first crimes that get plead away by the DA's. YOU progressives constantly fight to release violent criminals back out into society. Why is that? YOU progressives are constantly opening the door for violent criminals to come here from violent third world counties. Why is that? Not enough violent criminals here for you that you feel the need to import more?
Face it dude, the reason why we have so much violence here is because of progressives like you who have never met a violent criminal you didn't like.
Well 'dude' we are talking about "arms" control, if we are speaking to the wording of the 2nd A. And unless you are employed by an agency of the criminal justice system, you have no experience other than TV on how the process works. And in the future, address me as "Sir" or "Mr. Catcher".
You have to earn respect, thus I will continue to refer to you as "dude". I'm an Expert Witness and Officer of the Court. I assure you I know the legal system quite well. The wording of the 2nd is quite clear. The historical context is likewise quite well known. Political operatives like you try and twist the meaning but even a cursory knowledge exposes your tactics for the false narrative they are.
Says the Foolish Child.[
Hmmm... is a fucking fool any different than a regular fool?
I ask because you seem to lack the intellectual capability to qualify as a fool, thus I wonder if you were called a fucking fool in your formative days, and were insulted, even if you couldn't understand how fucking modified fool.
Really? 99.999 percent of the gun owners never commit a crime. There is a proven 8% of the criminal population that commits 80% of the violent crime. So you think it is correct to penalize 90 million people for the actions of less than 100,000? You're a fool.
Those who own, have in their custody and control a gun, kill innocent people, sometimes in mass. I think that's a problem. 99.999999% of people with a mental illness do not kill people with guns, yet the NRA and its members want to single them out as the problem. How many of 99.999% of gun owners are drunks, drug addicts, wife beaters and suffer from mental illness?
99.999999% of criminals never kill anyone, yet the NRA and its members want to deprive them of their 2nd A Rights.
The policy of the NRA, no control, no way, enables the 00000.1% who should never own or possess a gun to get one.
Now you're simply lying. The NRA is all for PEOPLE control. We have ample evidence that the only people affected by gun control laws are the law abiding. We know this. France has every anti gun law you want and they had a single mass shooting that killed more people than all of the mass shootings in the USA over the last 15 years. Add in Norway, another wry catcher approved country and between the two of them you have more unfortunate people killed than have been killed in the USA in over 20 years.
So, your gun control don't work dude. The NRA says if you use a gun to commit a crime you go to prison. In the US legal system the use a gun go to jail laws are the first crimes that get plead away by the DA's. YOU progressives constantly fight to release violent criminals back out into society. Why is that? YOU progressives are constantly opening the door for violent criminals to come here from violent third world counties. Why is that? Not enough violent criminals here for you that you feel the need to import more?
Face it dude, the reason why we have so much violence here is because of progressives like you who have never met a violent criminal you didn't like.
Well 'dude' we are talking about "arms" control, if we are speaking to the wording of the 2nd A. And unless you are employed by an agency of the criminal justice system, you have no experience other than TV on how the process works. And in the future, address me as "Sir" or "Mr. Catcher".
You have to earn respect, thus I will continue to refer to you as "dude". I'm an Expert Witness and Officer of the Court. I assure you I know the legal system quite well. The wording of the 2nd is quite clear. The historical context is likewise quite well known. Political operatives like you try and twist the meaning but even a cursory knowledge exposes your tactics for the false narrative they are.
You're not an expert witness and an officer of the court unless you are a LE officer or someone who has an obligation to promote justice and effective operation of the judicial system, such as a judge, an attorney, a bailiff, clerk or other personnel.
Expert witnesses are mostly hired guns, used by defense attorney's to support the theory of the crime and to provide testimony which is exculpatory.
When people who would rob a house know that a large percentage of homeowners in an area own firearms are they more or less likely to attempt a home break in?
Very few homes suffer home invasions, burglary is usually committed when no one is home.
Nothing in my position on gun control has ever proposed that the 2nd A. Right be repealed. I respect the right to own and possess a gun to protect one's home or business as long as the gun owner is sane, sober and responsible. Thus my advocacy for Licensing and Registration, which ought to be a states right's issue, and one supported by responsible gun owners.
The issues isn't whether or not you've proposed the 2nd Amendment be repealed but that you are one of those that wants to define sane, sober, and responsible. That way, you can get what you get the same result and can deny you really oppose the 2nd amendment. With what you say you support, you prove you want a certain end result without having to admit that's what you want. It's like Bill Clinton's depends on what the definition of "is" is. It's how Liberals operate.
I don't get to define sober, sane and responsible, that is for a legislature to determine. Is one DUI or two the determining factor of a sober person, is one detained as a danger to himself or others sane or not?
As usual your facts germinate between your ears, where reality never resides.
What makes the legislature experts in those matters? They would be defined using politics not reality.
Seems between your ears is where shit resides.
So we are to allow people not accountable to the people (the NRA) define our laws? You really are dumb.
There are plenty of senators and assembly members who have accepted money from the NRA and are biddable to their desires, but still accountable to the voters.
Funny ain't it, the right wing is all over the CGI but never a word is spoken against the NRA
F'n HYPOCRITES
When people who would rob a house know that a large percentage of homeowners in an area own firearms are they more or less likely to attempt a home break in?
Very few homes suffer home invasions, burglary is usually committed when no one is home.
Nothing in my position on gun control has ever proposed that the 2nd A. Right be repealed. I respect the right to own and possess a gun to protect one's home or business as long as the gun owner is sane, sober and responsible. Thus my advocacy for Licensing and Registration, which ought to be a states right's issue, and one supported by responsible gun owners.
The issues isn't whether or not you've proposed the 2nd Amendment be repealed but that you are one of those that wants to define sane, sober, and responsible. That way, you can get what you get the same result and can deny you really oppose the 2nd amendment. With what you say you support, you prove you want a certain end result without having to admit that's what you want. It's like Bill Clinton's depends on what the definition of "is" is. It's how Liberals operate.
I don't get to define sober, sane and responsible, that is for a legislature to determine. Is one DUI or two the determining factor of a sober person, is one detained as a danger to himself or others sane or not?
As usual your facts germinate between your ears, where reality never resides.
What makes the legislature experts in those matters? They would be defined using politics not reality.
Seems between your ears is where shit resides.
So we are to allow people not accountable to the people (the NRA) define our laws? You really are dumb.
There are plenty of senators and assembly members who have accepted money from the NRA and are biddable to their desires, but still accountable to the voters.
Funny ain't it, the right wing is all over the CGI but never a word is spoken against the NRA
F'n HYPOCRITES
Not totalitarian, but dishonest.The NRA is a group of citizens who band together based on common interests. It's a club. This club formed a special interest group to lobby politicians to protect the rights and interests of their members. Sorry you're such a totalitarian that you can't recognize that.
You have to love ignorant left-wing "logic". It's ok if people die so long as it's not by a shooting.Yeah I'll take your word over the Australian Bureau of Crime Research. And just because it's popular doesn't mean it's effective. Sheep like you tend to agree with everything your masters do.
That isn't issue (the ABCR). There are many other issues at stake.
Of course it is effective. There have been no mass shootings since the ban was in place.
Sadly...you're one of them. But here you go cupcake: you lose.Too many loonies out there. Every week now.
[
no man is free. We are a society and in a society there have always been rules. One must follow the rules or pay the consequences. Your point is what?
Face it dude, the reason why we have so much violence here is because of progressives like you who have never met a violent criminal you didn't like.
So 1996 Rampage killing by Peter May, who shot dead six members of his family before killing himself[8]
1996 Port Arthur 35 dead
2002 Monash University
2011 Hectorville
2014 Hunt Family murders
2014 Logan SHooting
2014 Sydney siege
Seems to me you have plenty of gun crimes and the ones listed are where more than one person was killed and/or shot
I wonder how many more crimes are committed with guns where only one person is shot and/or killed
Seems to me that your research bureau was right. The gun ban had no real effect on crime
You have to love ignorant left-wing "logic". It's ok if people die so long as it's not by a shooting.Yeah I'll take your word over the Australian Bureau of Crime Research. And just because it's popular doesn't mean it's effective. Sheep like you tend to agree with everything your masters do.
That isn't issue (the ABCR). There are many other issues at stake.
Of course it is effective. There have been no mass shootings since the ban was in place.
Mia Ayliffe-Chung sure needed a gun yesterday. If Australia wasn't an inbred, backwoods, authoritarian state, she'd still be alive today...
Man Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Stabs British Woman; Authorities Say ‘Nothing to do With Religion’
So 1996 Rampage killing by Peter May, who shot dead six members of his family before killing himself[8]
1996 Port Arthur 35 dead
2002 Monash University
2011 Hectorville
2014 Hunt Family murders
2014 Logan SHooting
2014 Sydney siege
Seems to me you have plenty of gun crimes and the ones listed are where more than one person was killed and/or shot
I wonder how many more crimes are committed with guns where only one person is shot and/or killed
Seems to me that your research bureau was right. The gun ban had no real effect on crime
I've already said 'since Port Arthur'. Those gun laws came into effect after that. There have been little or no random shootings since. Most of the ones you have mentioned have been domestics. Certainly nothing on the scale of Port Arthur, which was the reason the legislation was brought into place. And it has had a huge effect on mass killings. There haven't been any. Period.
Yeah...and 6,999 of them weren't armed when they died, stupid.And you've had over 7000 people die this year alone via a firearm. How's being armed to the teeth helping you out?
Amd you're solution to that is to disarm us so that we can all become victims? Idiot. You just made the greatest case for why firearms must be legal. Thank you.You have so much violence because you're a violent nation.
Who cares that it was from a firearm? Your ignorant position is that it's ok to be murdered so long as it's not from a bullet. Every single human on earth would rather take a bullet than experience the long, agonizing, and horrific act of being stabbed to death.You have to love ignorant left-wing "logic". It's ok if people die so long as it's not by a shooting.
Mia Ayliffe-Chung sure needed a gun yesterday. If Australia wasn't an inbred, backwoods, authoritarian state, she'd still be alive today...
Man Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Stabs British Woman; Authorities Say ‘Nothing to do With Religion’
And you've had over 7000 people die this year alone via a firearm. How's being armed to the teeth helping you out?
Who cares that it was from a firearm? Your ignorant position is that it's ok to be murdered so long as it's not from a bullet. Every single human on earth would rather take a bullet than experience the long, agonizing, and horrific act of being stabbed to death.You have to love ignorant left-wing "logic". It's ok if people die so long as it's not by a shooting.
Mia Ayliffe-Chung sure needed a gun yesterday. If Australia wasn't an inbred, backwoods, authoritarian state, she'd still be alive today...
Man Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Stabs British Woman; Authorities Say ‘Nothing to do With Religion’
And you've had over 7000 people die this year alone via a firearm. How's being armed to the teeth helping you out?
Who cares that it was from a firearm? Your ignorant position is that it's ok to be murdered so long as it's not from a bullet. Every single human on earth would rather take a bullet than experience the long, agonizing, and horrific act of being stabbed to death.You have to love ignorant left-wing "logic". It's ok if people die so long as it's not by a shooting.
Mia Ayliffe-Chung sure needed a gun yesterday. If Australia wasn't an inbred, backwoods, authoritarian state, she'd still be alive today...
Man Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Stabs British Woman; Authorities Say ‘Nothing to do With Religion’
And you've had over 7000 people die this year alone via a firearm. How's being armed to the teeth helping you out?
Who cares that it was from a firearm? Your ignorant position is that it's ok to be murdered so long as it's not from a bullet. Every single human on earth would rather take a bullet than experience the long, agonizing, and horrific act of being stabbed to death.You have to love ignorant left-wing "logic". It's ok if people die so long as it's not by a shooting.
Mia Ayliffe-Chung sure needed a gun yesterday. If Australia wasn't an inbred, backwoods, authoritarian state, she'd still be alive today...
Man Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Stabs British Woman; Authorities Say ‘Nothing to do With Religion’
And you've had over 7000 people die this year alone via a firearm. How's being armed to the teeth helping you out?
You ought never call anyone an "idiot".
Getting shot allows for no defense. Come at me with a knife and I will do the best I can to put the two knuckles of my middle and index finger on the center of your throat. Hard to do when some coward fires a gun from 10 feet or more away.
