Fbi Report Ends Nra Nonsense About "good Guys With Guns"

[Skull Pilot]

[
your stupid study would mean that there were 43 million deaths because killing a thug is not the only way a weapon stops crime

that study was debunked

only morons and dishonest assholes repeat it

Well, no, t here's no real evidence guns stop crimes, other than bogus studies by the NRA and the Gun Lobby that detail how having a gun made a guy like you with a tiny pecker feel better.

The real statistic- only 200 gun deaths r uled 'Justifiable" when civilians were doing the shooting.

Compared to 19,500 suicides, 11,101 murders and 800 accidents.

SUICIDES DON"T COUNT.

Suicide is not a crime so please at least be honest when you talk about crime and leave suicides out of it.

If someone wants to kill himself it's none of your business

 

[Skull Pilot]

[

Yeah, sure you do.

Is there really anything else to say? ALL of your arguments have been destroyed completely. You keep trying desperately, but unfortunately for you, I think you have no arguments against our second amendment rights.

Sure I do.

the word "Gun" doesn't appear anywhere in the Second Amendment.

"bear arms" means keeping a militia. Not private gun ownership.

Wrong again.

The militia is secondary to the right to bear arms.

The people have the right to bear arms.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Yeah, sure you do.

Is there really anything else to say? ALL of your arguments have been destroyed completely. You keep trying desperately, but unfortunately for you, I think you have no arguments against our second amendment rights.

Sure I do.

the word "Gun" doesn't appear anywhere in the Second Amendment.

"bear arms" means keeping a militia. Not private gun ownership.

Wrong again.

The militia is secondary to the right to bear arms.

The people have the right to bear arms.

Within a "Well-Regulated" militia.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[

Yeah, sure you do.

Is there really anything else to say? ALL of your arguments have been destroyed completely. You keep trying desperately, but unfortunately for you, I think you have no arguments against our second amendment rights.

Sure I do.

the word "Gun" doesn't appear anywhere in the Second Amendment.

"bear arms" means keeping a militia. Not private gun ownership.

Wrong again.

The militia is secondary to the right to bear arms.

The people have the right to bear arms.

Within a "Well-Regulated" militia.

Nowhere is it implied one must belong to a militia in order to own a firearm.

I've previously posted an examination of the second amendment's language go look it up.

 

[ChrisL]

[

Yeah, sure you do.

Is there really anything else to say? ALL of your arguments have been destroyed completely. You keep trying desperately, but unfortunately for you, I think you have no arguments against our second amendment rights.

Sure I do.

the word "Gun" doesn't appear anywhere in the Second Amendment.

"bear arms" means keeping a militia. Not private gun ownership.

Wrong again.

The militia is secondary to the right to bear arms.

The people have the right to bear arms.

Within a "Well-Regulated" militia.

The "people" are the militia. Obviously Joe does not understand the Bill of Rights. What an idiot. The Bill of Rights does NOT give the government any powers. The 2nd Amendment and ALL of the Bill of Rights applies to the PEOPLE of the United States, you dummy. Good grief! Do us all a favor and go back to school before you try to involve yourself in conversations that are too advanced for your educational level.

 

[RKMBrown]

[

Yeah, sure you do.

Is there really anything else to say? ALL of your arguments have been destroyed completely. You keep trying desperately, but unfortunately for you, I think you have no arguments against our second amendment rights.

Sure I do.

the word "Gun" doesn't appear anywhere in the Second Amendment.

"bear arms" means keeping a militia. Not private gun ownership.

You're an idiot.

 

[ChrisL]

[

Yeah, sure you do.

Is there really anything else to say? ALL of your arguments have been destroyed completely. You keep trying desperately, but unfortunately for you, I think you have no arguments against our second amendment rights.

Sure I do.

the word "Gun" doesn't appear anywhere in the Second Amendment.

"bear arms" means keeping a militia. Not private gun ownership.

You're an idiot.

Only an idiot would think that the Bill of Rights grants powers to the government. Can you believe that? He thinks that the 2nd amendment applies to a "government organized militia." How ignorant is that?

If he doesn't understand that the Bill of Rights and Constitution gives right to the citizens and NOT to any governmental entities, then he has bigger problems than I thought.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Nowhere is it implied one must belong to a militia in order to own a firearm.

I've previously posted an examination of the second amendment's language go look it up.

Yeah, and I don't buy it. Bearing Arms meant having organized military units.

Or as a Founding Slave Rapist might say, "A well-regulated Militia".

Come on, Thomas Jefferson didn't want Sally Hemmings to have a gun before he raped the shit out of her.

The word "Gun" "Rifle" or "Firearm" appear nowhere in that amendment.

 

[percysunshine]

[
Nowhere is it implied one must belong to a militia in order to own a firearm.

I've previously posted an examination of the second amendment's language go look it up.

Yeah, and I don't buy it. Bearing Arms meant having organized military units.

Or as a Founding Slave Rapist might say, "A well-regulated Militia".

Come on, Thomas Jefferson didn't want Sally Hemmings to have a gun before he raped the shit out of her.

The word "Gun" "Rifle" or "Firearm" appear nowhere in that amendment.

Neither do the words 'Slave' or 'Rapist'

...go figure...

 

[JoeB131]

[

Only an idiot would think that the Bill of Rights grants powers to the government. Can you believe that? He thinks that the 2nd amendment applies to a "government organized militia." How ignorant is that?

If he doesn't understand that the Bill of Rights and Constitution gives right to the citizens and NOT to any governmental entities, then he has bigger problems than I thought.

No, I find it odd that you would try to make decisions on what to do today based on what a Slave Raping asshole 230 years ago thought about something.

For instance, if I were suffering from Strep Throat, I would not go in for a good bleeding like a Founding Slave Rapist would have. I'd get a medical professional and get anti-biotics, because that's how we roll in the 21st century.

Now, while a 18th Century Slave Rapist might want to "Bear Arms" in a militia so he could put down slave revolts and occassional commit acts of Genocide against Native Americans (both of whom they struggled very hard to keep from getting guns) I'd ask a question of does it make sense to have every citizen own a gun in the 21st century when the cost of that is 32,000 firearm deaths and 78,000 firearm injuries every year.

 

[Wildman]

[
Nowhere is it implied one must belong to a militia in order to own a firearm.

I've previously posted an examination of the second amendment's language go look it up.

Yeah, and I don't buy it. Bearing Arms meant having organized military units.

Or as a Founding Slave Rapist might say, "A well-regulated Militia".

Come on, Thomas Jefferson didn't want Sally Hemmings to have a gun before he raped the shit out of her.

The word "Gun" "Rifle" or "Firearm" appear nowhere in that amendment.

...................
did you inherit your stupidity thru gene therapy or is it a family trait ?

................. you are so full of

 

[JoeB131]

So you have nothing to add, then, Wilddouche?

 

[2aguy]

The word "Gun" "Rifle" or "Firearm" appear nowhere in that amendment.

Ummmm...that would be the "arms" word...it means...well...weapons....

 

[2aguy]

commit acts of Genocide against Native Americans

Genocide was not comitted against the early Americans...

 

[2aguy]

I'd ask a question of does it make sense to have every citizen own a gun in the 21st century when the cost of that is 32,000 firearm deaths and 78,000 firearm injuries every year.

Um....yeah...since guns save lives and stop crime at least 760,000 times a year...and as high as 3 million times a year...

and the study with the most credibility puts the number at 2.5 million times a year...sooooo...

10-12,000 gun murders a year vs. 2.5 million times a gun is used to save a life or stop a violent crime

I do not include suicides since Japan has absolute gun control and has a higher rate of suicide than we do....

The numbers do not support your position...

And when you are the person facing a monster, in a dark place, all by yourself...that gun will keep you safe...because the police aren't there...

 

[JoeB131]

commit acts of Genocide against Native Americans

Genocide was not comitted against the early Americans...

Well, just because they didn't have a word for it back then doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[JoeB131]

I'd ask a question of does it make sense to have every citizen own a gun in the 21st century when the cost of that is 32,000 firearm deaths and 78,000 firearm injuries every year.

Um....yeah...since guns save lives and stop crime at least 760,000 times a year...and as high as 3 million times a year...

and the study with the most credibility puts the number at 2.5 million times a year...sooooo...

10-12,000 gun murders a year vs. 2.5 million times a gun is used to save a life or stop a violent crime

I do not include suicides since Japan has absolute gun control and has a higher rate of suicide than we do....

The numbers do not support your position...

And when you are the person facing a monster, in a dark place, all by yourself...that gun will keep you safe...because the police aren't there...

Japan has a higher suicide rate because Suicide is considered acceptable.

They however, only had 11 handgun murders in 2011. Compared to the 11,101 we had.

 

[2aguy]

Well, just because they didn't have a word for it back then doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It didn't happen...genocide is an act of will...interchanging diseases between two populations who have no immunity to it is not genocide...

Japan has a higher suicide rate because Suicide is considered acceptable.

You missed the point...apparently some 18,000 or more people here decided suicide was acceptable and would have done it wether there was a gun available or not...just like in Japan and other gun control countries that have higher suicide rates than we do...

 

[JoeB131]

Well, just because they didn't have a word for it back then doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It didn't happen...genocide is an act of will...interchanging diseases between two populations who have no immunity to it is not genocide...

Well, it does if they KNOW the diseases are doing the trick for them. When White Settlers gave the Indians blankets infected with smallpox, they might not have understood germ theory, but they knew what the result was.

People at the time knew what was going on.

A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We can also talk about how Philip Sheridan authorized hunting the bison to near extinction in order to deprive the Plains Indians of a food source.

http://history.msu.edu/hst321/files/2010/07/smits-on-bison.pdf

Japan has a higher suicide rate because Suicide is considered acceptable.

You missed the point...apparently some 18,000 or more people here decided suicide was acceptable and would have done it wether there was a gun available or not...just like in Japan and other gun control countries that have higher suicide rates than we do...

Well, again, that's debatable.

Japan does have a higher suicide rate than we do.

But Canada, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom all have lower ones.

List of OECD countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[2aguy]

Well, it does if they KNOW the diseases are doing the trick for them. When White Settlers gave the Indians blankets infected with smallpox, they might not have understood germ theory, but they knew what the result was.

You do know there is no record of that happening...right...there was one case at a fort where an indian ally was given a blanket and other supplies from medical stores that may have been infected....but the disease was already in the area...and there was a letter from one British officer to another who wondered if it would be possible but there was no recorded action taken...