France banned all rifles...130 dead in attack on Rock Concert, here...58 killed

[Lewdog]

Lewdog, You are (as I did .... as most people do) assuming the "news" accounts are true.

When a person understands the reality of OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD,
then the person ceases to assume the "news" accounts are true.

And when people take one or two incidents and try to extrapolate it out to almost every event that they can't comprehend a reason for it happening...

 

[Asclepias]

Its weird to me that the vast majority of people that think this is a conspiracy are the same people that swear cops never lie about killing Black people..

 

[JohnPrewett]

Its weird to me that the vast majority of people that think this is a conspiracy are the same people that swear cops never lie about killing Black people..

Nobody swears "cops never lie" (about killings of black or white people)

But you knew that, didn't you ?

I'd bet you presume blacks never lie about their interactions with police.

Truth hating twits act like Operation Mockingbird is irrelevant.

 

[JohnPrewett]

Lewdog, You are (as I did .... as most people do) assuming the "news" accounts are true.

When a person understands the reality of OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD,
then the person ceases to assume the "news" accounts are true.

And when people take one or two incidents and try to extrapolate it out to almost every event that they can't comprehend a reason for it happening...

Quite a few have noticed that the official narrative of the Vegas shooting stinks. Which is no problem for truth hating twits.

 

[Lewdog]

Lewdog, You are (as I did .... as most people do) assuming the "news" accounts are true.

When a person understands the reality of OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD,
then the person ceases to assume the "news" accounts are true.

And when people take one or two incidents and try to extrapolate it out to almost every event that they can't comprehend a reason for it happening...

Quite a few have noticed that the official narrative of the Vegas shooting stinks. Which is no problem for truth hating twits.

And then there are people like you that think you can be cool and back some kind of conspiracy theory because one happened once upon a time, with the narrative that if you turn out to be wrong you'll just argue that we are being lied to, and if you are right you're smarter than everyone else.

Problem with all that is... there are people in this world that are too smart and can see right through it.

 

[ph3iron]

Not a deflection. You can't compare the two incidents. One had 7-8 attackers, the other had a lone gunman.

Guns and the banning of them is the argument. What does the number of perpetrators in an incident have to do with France banning guns? If anything it proves they are even MORE readily available. You're like trying to walk a drunk through a doorway.

Do you have problems with logic? The two incidents are not alike, therefor they can't be compared.

France was worse and demonstrated that gun bans do not work....

The guns the Las Vegas shooter used were illegal. Your argument doesn't hold water.

Was the Las Vegas shooter stopped by an armed citizen?

No....but other mass shooters have been stopped...so you have no argument.

How do you respond to a Star Wars dumb pic who doesn't know the difference between an adjective and a noun?

 

[Lewdog]

Guns and the banning of them is the argument. What does the number of perpetrators in an incident have to do with France banning guns? If anything it proves they are even MORE readily available. You're like trying to walk a drunk through a doorway.

Do you have problems with logic? The two incidents are not alike, therefor they can't be compared.

France was worse and demonstrated that gun bans do not work....

The guns the Las Vegas shooter used were illegal. Your argument doesn't hold water.

Was the Las Vegas shooter stopped by an armed citizen?

No....but other mass shooters have been stopped...so you have no argument.

How do you respond to a Star Wars dumb pic who doesn't know the difference between an adjective and a noun?

You think my avatar is a Star Wars pic?

And then you go on to try and correct my grammar while making such a stupid statement?

 

[2aguy]

We presented you all the evidence you need. The guns used to commit the crimes are ILLEGAL EVERYWHERE! What difference does any of the blabbering in the article make to that simple statement?

YOU presented all the information in the argument I need... that has to be the dumbest, most ridiculously stupid retort in a discussion I have ever heard.

Is that how you got your education?

I'm really starting to believe you aren't the person you say you are. A well educated individual would NEVER make a statement like that.

Present a single explanation why the guns that were illegal EVERYWHERE, were able to traverse hundreds of miles of terrain where they are illegal, and how if that is a fact, as it is, then how on Earth do you think that ANY gun ban anywhere can work.

Any person will tell you that the most vulnerable time for ANY illicit product is when it is in transit. They were able to get the guns from the furthest reaches of the middle east, across an ocean, across hundreds of miles of roads, with countless cops and inspectors, and lo and behold they are EASY to obtain by anyone.

So, yet again, that is what is called a fact. The article you are so proud of tells us why the guns were able to get to France, but doesn't address the fact that those guns were illegal along their entire route of travel. Are they able to dematerialize and then rematerialize where they are wanted?

Or are the police simply not able to prevent the illegal transport of weapons of war.

How about you take 5 minutes to read the link I posted instead of arguing with me?

I did. It doesn't address the simple fact that the guns are illegal EVERYWHERE. How about you address that fact.

You did? Then did you read the part about how easily guns get smuggled into Europe by organized crime? Did you also read that as long as someone can get inside the European countries that are a part of the Schengen agreement they can pretty much move throughout all the countries easily and without problems? Now tell me how you can compare France to the U.S. on that. Does the U.S. have agreements with the countries that border it that people can cross the borders without anyone stopping to ask them questions or check their IDs and possibly use drugs/bomb sniffing dogs and face recognition software.

So yes, France's gun laws are made less relevant because of Globalization and the fact that their ability to monitor guns is actually dependent on how well OTHER countries that are on the borders of the Schengen Agreement monitor THEIR borders and the things that get in.

Yeah......you should have stopped at.....

did you read the part about how easily guns get smuggled into Europe by organized crime?

Because you just made our case for us...again....

 

[Lewdog]

YOU presented all the information in the argument I need... that has to be the dumbest, most ridiculously stupid retort in a discussion I have ever heard.

Is that how you got your education?

I'm really starting to believe you aren't the person you say you are. A well educated individual would NEVER make a statement like that.

Present a single explanation why the guns that were illegal EVERYWHERE, were able to traverse hundreds of miles of terrain where they are illegal, and how if that is a fact, as it is, then how on Earth do you think that ANY gun ban anywhere can work.

Any person will tell you that the most vulnerable time for ANY illicit product is when it is in transit. They were able to get the guns from the furthest reaches of the middle east, across an ocean, across hundreds of miles of roads, with countless cops and inspectors, and lo and behold they are EASY to obtain by anyone.

So, yet again, that is what is called a fact. The article you are so proud of tells us why the guns were able to get to France, but doesn't address the fact that those guns were illegal along their entire route of travel. Are they able to dematerialize and then rematerialize where they are wanted?

Or are the police simply not able to prevent the illegal transport of weapons of war.

How about you take 5 minutes to read the link I posted instead of arguing with me?

I did. It doesn't address the simple fact that the guns are illegal EVERYWHERE. How about you address that fact.

You did? Then did you read the part about how easily guns get smuggled into Europe by organized crime? Did you also read that as long as someone can get inside the European countries that are a part of the Schengen agreement they can pretty much move throughout all the countries easily and without problems? Now tell me how you can compare France to the U.S. on that. Does the U.S. have agreements with the countries that border it that people can cross the borders without anyone stopping to ask them questions or check their IDs and possibly use drugs/bomb sniffing dogs and face recognition software.

So yes, France's gun laws are made less relevant because of Globalization and the fact that their ability to monitor guns is actually dependent on how well OTHER countries that are on the borders of the Schengen Agreement monitor THEIR borders and the things that get in.

Yeah......you should have stopped at.....

did you read the part about how easily guns get smuggled into Europe by organized crime?

Because you just made our case for us...again....

And because you stopped reading there, you didn't realize that the gun issues with France isn't related to their gun laws, but other issues like the Schengen Agreement and Globalization. But of course you wouldn't go there, because that would ruin your whole argument.

 

[BlackSand]

And because you stopped reading there, you didn't realize that the gun issues with France isn't related to their gun laws, but other issues like the Schengen Agreement and Globalization. But of course you wouldn't go there, because that would ruin your whole argument.

So ... If the Schengen Agreement and Globalization are the downfall of proper security against illegal activities ...
Are you suggesting we should tighten boarder security and limit immigration or regional migration?

.

 

[Lewdog]

And because you stopped reading there, you didn't realize that the gun issues with France isn't related to their gun laws, but other issues like the Schengen Agreement and Globalization. But of course you wouldn't go there, because that would ruin your whole argument.

So ... If the Schengen Agreement and Globalization are the downfall of proper security against illegal activities ...
Are you suggesting we should tighten boarder security and limit immigration or regional migration?

.

If you ask many in Europe now, they will tell you they are having second thoughts on the agreement, the idea of the EU, and transferring their currency to the Euro. Of course there is absolutely no comparison for their border controls to those of the U.S.

 

[BlackSand]

If you ask many in Europe now, they will tell you they are having second thoughts on the agreement, the idea of the EU, and transferring their currency to the Euro. Of course there is absolutely no comparison for their border controls to those of the U.S.

So your answer would be "no" ... And your initial assertion was just bullshit convenient enough for you to use in futile attempts to make a point ...

.

 

[Lewdog]

If you ask many in Europe now, they will tell you they are having second thoughts on the agreement, the idea of the EU, and transferring their currency to the Euro. Of course there is absolutely no comparison for their border controls to those of the U.S.

So your answer would be "no" ... And your initial assertion was just bullshit convenient enough for you to use in futile attempts to make a point ...

.

My answer would be no? How the **** do you get that out of what I said?

 

[BlackSand]

My answer would be no? How the **** do you get that out of what I said?

You cannot have it both ways.

You suggest that the Schengen Agreement and globalization are what aid illegal activity (to include illegal weapons transport).
The Schengen Agreement loosens border restrictions and aids immigration into and migration throughout the EU.

There isn't a question as to whether or not we already have a porous border and a multitude of illegal immigrants.
So ... if unchecked border crossings and open immigration are at fault ... It doesn't matter how different the EU and the US are ... They need to be addressed.

I gathered you were against the idea of tighter border controls and limited immigration/migration ... When you suggested our controls were better than the EU.
Whether or not ours are better ... We still suffer the same penetrations and unchecked crossings.

In turn ... if you do think we should have tighter border control and limited immigration/migration ... At least that is a step in the right direction.

.

 

[Lewdog]

My answer would be no? How the **** do you get that out of what I said?

You cannot have it both ways.

You suggest that the Schengen Agreement and globalization are what aid illegal activity (to include illegal weapons transport).
The Schengen Agreement loosens border restrictions and aids immigration into and migration throughout the EU.

There isn't a question as to whether or not we already have a porous border and a multitude of illegal immigrants.
So ... if unchecked border crossings and open immigration are at fault ... It doesn't matter how different the EU and the US are ... They need to be addressed.

I gathered you were against the idea of tighter border controls and limited immigration/migration ... When you suggested our controls were better than the EU.
Whether or not ours are better ... We still suffer the same penetrations and unchecked crossings.

.

No, I have no problem with Good border protection, but even with what we have, it is not even close to as porous as those in the EU. A lot of people don't even realize just how much border protection we really have... they presume it is extremely porous because that's a political talking point that politicians repeat over and over to get elected.

 

[BlackSand]

No, I have no problem with Good border protection, but even with what we have, it is not even close to as porous as those in the EU. A lot of people don't even realize just how much border protection we really have... they presume it is extremely porous because that's a political talking point that politicians repeat over and over to get elected.

I don't presume anything ... I have been to border countless times.
I also know that the illegal immigration problem isn't a fairytale either ... And is more valid than any political nonsense ...

.

 

[Lewdog]

No, I have no problem with Good border protection, but even with what we have, it is not even close to as porous as those in the EU. A lot of people don't even realize just how much border protection we really have... they presume it is extremely porous because that's a political talking point that politicians repeat over and over to get elected.

I don't presume anything ... I have been to border countless times.
I also know that the illegal immigration problem isn't a fairytale either ... And is more valid than any political nonsense ...

.

Like how even without a border wall, all of a sudden under Trump the government is releasing these huge numbers that illegal immigration is down like 90%? Why do we need a border wall anymore then?

If you've been through border check points so often, have you seen the dogs walking around sniffing for bombs and drugs? How about the cameras doing facial recognition on all the visitors?

Did you know that the U.S. has even put in changes for U.S. citizens to return to the U.S.?

https://travel.usnews.com/features/what-you-need-to-know-about-upcoming-passport-changes

 

[BlackSand]

Like how even without a border wall, all of a sudden under Trump the government is releasing these huge numbers that illegal immigration is down like 90%? Why do we need a border wall anymore then?

If you've been through border check points so often, have you seen the dogs walking around sniffing for bombs and drugs? How about the cameras doing facial recognition on all the visitors?

Did you know that the U.S. has even put in changes for U.S. citizens to return to the U.S.?

https://travel.usnews.com/features/what-you-need-to-know-about-upcoming-passport-changes

The illegal immigrants usually don't go through border crossings ... But you can see them crossing wherever else they can find a hole.

.

 

[Lewdog]

Like how even without a border wall, all of a sudden under Trump the government is releasing these huge numbers that illegal immigration is down like 90%? Why do we need a border wall anymore then?

If you've been through border check points so often, have you seen the dogs walking around sniffing for bombs and drugs? How about the cameras doing facial recognition on all the visitors?

Did you know that the U.S. has even put in changes for U.S. citizens to return to the U.S.?

https://travel.usnews.com/features/what-you-need-to-know-about-upcoming-passport-changes

The illegal immigrants usually don't go through border crossings ... But you can see them crossing wherever else they can find a hole.

.

I just said... quoting what several posts have been posted on this forum, since Trump has become President illegal immigrants are down like 90%. That's even without having a border wall, so why do we still need a border wall? (Sorry it is actually 76%)

Illegal immigration across southwest border down 70 percent under Trump


You sure have a problem delineating between comments. I even leave a big space between each statement to try and help you out...

 

[BlackSand]

I just said... quoting what several posts have been posted on this forum, since Trump has become President illegal immigrants are down like 90%. That's even without having a border wall, so why do we still need a border wall? (Sorry it is actually 76%)

Illegal immigration across southwest border down 70 percent under Trump


You sure have a problem delineating between comments. I even leave a big space between each statement to try and help you out...

Well ... I gather you are willing to accept President Trump's assessment of the situation.
I am still skeptical ... But glad you feel comfortable President Trump is keeping you safe ...

.