Guns in home kills family of five.

[Rshermr]

And mental illness... So why do the gun grabbers target Law abiding citizens? The question so few progressives want to answer...

I am actually much more interested in what has made you so paranoid. So, again, 20 elementry school kids, and you worry about not having access to a 30 round magazine. Or being able to buy guns without background checks. Seems obvious enough that your priorities are really fucked up.

Why would you want to deny a law abiding legal gun owning citizen's of a 30 round magazine or even a thousand round magazine if one did exist ? Are you grouping law abiding citizens in with criminals, and if you are, what right do you have in doing this? Is there evidence that you have in which suggest that a law abiding gun owning citizen is a threat to the people, communities and government in this nation ? No you don't have, so why group them altogether unless it is for pure political motives and/or agenda's being sought after by the left or democrat politicians along with the dem/liberal voters in this way?

So you want to tell me you can attest that all who buy, say, 30 round mags, are trust worthy, that they will keep them securely stored, that they will never be stolen. If you attest to that, you are a fool. Because these items are stollen, and sold. A good friend of mine is making good money, again, selling to paranoid gun nuts. Almost entirely high capacity mags. And laughing his ass off.

So, do I believe they will be secure. no. No more than the guns of the Connecticut child killer's mother. So, want to explain how that worked???

 

[Rshermr]

So, I asked jimmy the following:

I simply look around the world and wonder why we have more gun deaths than any other industrialize nation. By at least 10 times.

To which Jimmy says:

More bullshit. Russia, the Ukraine, the Baltic nations, Finland and more have far more gun related deaths than we do.

Damn, jimmy, you forgot somalia and the congo. You really go after those industrialized countries.

Finland. .45 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #4 (high numbers because they include Suicide)
US 2.97 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #1
Ukrain .22 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #84
Russian numbers are not there, but thought to be well under Ukrain.
So, See what I was saying. You were trying to mislead, eh, Jimmy. kinda dishonest. If you look at this source, you will find that when i said over 10 times as many, I was not exaggerating.
Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | guardian.co.uk

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Right. Show me a country, me boy, in this world, today, where guns are being confiscated. Among the 35 industrialized nations.

So, Jimmy says:

How long do you think it takes to take away peoples guns? But the UK, Australia and New Zealand have stolen almost every one of their citizens rifles and handguns, to answer your stupid ass question.

So, lets check jimmy for lies again. One country at a time.

Australia. After another mass murder in the country, the Australian gov passed gun laws that made all semi automatic guns illegal. Including rifles, shotguns, and handguns. However, where jimmy said the guns were stolen. the gov paid market value plus 10%. I think that qualifies as a lie, jimmy? And, the law did not take almost every one of their citizens rifles and handguns. All non semiautomatic guns were not affected. Kind of another lie, eh jimmy?
Now, it is important to note that Australia is not a dictatorship. The people of the country could have stopped the law. But the regulation had close to 85% support of the citizenry. If it had not, the law would not have happened. Kind of forgot that too, eh Jimmy?
Below is a link to the source for this info. Because, you see, I have nothing to hide. Because I do not lie.
Guest opinion: Gun control, Australian style - Boulder Daily Camera

New Zealand
Wow, jimmy. Now you are lying, eh. No gun laws stop ownership of guns of any kind in Australia. None have EVER been taken from gun owners. But assault rifles are registered. Now, jimmy, this is getting embarasing. I had hoped you had at least SOME integrity. But you seem to lie without any concern.
New Zealand Gun Laws

UK
Now here is a place where it is hard to own a gun. But you can do so. But no assault rifles, and other types are not allowed. Pretty complex laws. Again we tend to understand that the UK is not a dictatorship, and the populace seems to support the laws. By the way, no confiscations of guns in a mass sort of way. Individual rights are revolked if a gun owner is found to be unsafe.
BBC News - Gun control and ownership laws in the UK

So, there we have it. No stolen guns. But lots of lies, jimmy. All on your part.

i would respond to the rest of your post. But why respond to a liar, eh, jimmy. Must be sad being you.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So, I asked jimmy the following:

I simply look around the world and wonder why we have more gun deaths than any other industrialize nation. By at least 10 times.

To which Jimmy says:

More bullshit. Russia, the Ukraine, the Baltic nations, Finland and more have far more gun related deaths than we do.

Damn, jimmy, you forgot somalia and the congo. You really go after those industrialized countries.

So now Russia is no more industrialized than Somalia? That is bullshit and you know it. Russia is among the more advanced nations on the planet and heavily industrialized as well.

Finland. .45 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #4 (high numbers because they include Suicide)
US 2.97 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #1
Ukrain .22 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #84
Russian numbers are not there, but thought to be well under Ukrain.
So, See what I was saying. You were trying to mislead, eh, Jimmy. kinda dishonest. If you look at this source, you will find that when i said over 10 times as many, I was not exaggerating.

Meh, I was mistaken because I forgot how you gun grabbing whores are OK with homicide as long as it isnt done with a gun.

There are plenty of nations with a much higher homicide rate than the US if considering ALL homicides.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why are you gun grabbers OK with murdering people with a boot knife? Oh, that is right because innocent weaker people armed with a gun are able to defend themselves against the thugs that socialists and Marxists tend to hire to jack people up and often kill them. This goes back to the common ties between socialist parties and criminal organizations that have been around at least a century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_organization#Communist_fronts

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | guardian.co.uk

The Guardian's long and fanatic history of supporting gun confiscation should be noted here.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Right. Show me a country, me boy, in this world, today, where guns are being confiscated. Among the 35 industrialized nations.

So, Jimmy says:

How long do you think it takes to take away peoples guns? But the UK, Australia and New Zealand have stolen almost every one of their citizens rifles and handguns, to answer your stupid ass question.

So, lets check jimmy for lies again. One country at a time.

Australia. After another mass murder in the country, the Australian gov passed gun laws that made all semi automatic guns illegal. Including rifles, shotguns, and handguns. However, where jimmy said the guns were stolen. the gov paid market value plus 10%. I think that qualifies as a lie, jimmy? And, the law did not take almost every one of their citizens rifles and handguns. All non semiautomatic guns were not affected. Kind of another lie, eh jimmy?

Lol, do you know what a NONsemi-automatic gun is dumbass? A bolt action rifle is about it. Some gun grabbers claim that revolvers are semi-automatics since they automatically realign a fresh round for firing, lol.
And your gun grabbing whore of a columnist is lying, too, which is why you quote him.

Also, forcing people to turn in their property to be given 'fair market value for them' is a cheap dodge for confiscating the property since 'fair market value' drops to very little after a building is condemned (no matter how good shape it is actually in) or after a government has placed a ban on that kind of property, such as guns. Again, you try to conceal theft in the form of forced government 'buy backs' that do not give the owner compensation they freely agree to and have no choice about. Yes, that is legal THEFT, and legal only because the government does it. If a private citizen did that the government would put him on trial (unless the criminal was a socialist with connections, of course).

Here are the facts from a neutral (relatively) source on Australian gun laws.

Gun politics in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories determined by the National Firearm Agreement with different levels of control. The categories are:
Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.
Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.
Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.
Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.
Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. ... This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of six months using club handguns, and a minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun.

So to own a Class A shotgun (hand reloading) or a RIMFIRE (basically a .22 round or smaller) bolt action rifle you have to have a "good reason" which translates into "if you have a friend in the government maybe you can get one, everyone else can forget about it" which is similar to the case for getting a concealed carry license in the state of Maryland a state who rarely ever agrees that anyone has a good reason to carry a gun concealed.

To own a Class B weapon (bolt action center fire and MUZZLE LODAING rifles), you have to show "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need", and why a class A weapon isnt suitable enough. So your far less likely to be able to buy or be allowed to own a bolt action rifle than a bolt action rimfire .22 rifle and those are practically banned.

Class C and D are strictly banned, and air powered handguns and handguns that are deactivated are allowed only to target shooters that can prove long membership in a state approved organization.

Any gun owner should look at this example of "reasonable gun regulation" according to this gun grabber and know what they are backing for us here in the US: effective gun confiscation and banning. We should also note how this gun grabbing whore lies yet again about only semi-autos being banned, apparently he thinks that the government allowing a few socialists and Marxist friends of the state to own guns makes such restrictions not a ban, lol.

Now, it is important to note that Australia is not a dictatorship.

Lol, it is moving in that direction and the people of Australia wont be able to do anything about it when the government moves into the kind of 'democracy' people enjoy in Venezuela and Cuba. Funny how you libtards are OK with a government as long as they claim to be a 'peoples democratic republic' etc, no matter how obvious the charade is.

The people of the country could have stopped the law.

Again, bullshit. The people could only have stopped it in theory, much like the people of the UK were supposed to get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and giving their sovereignty over to the EU, but did notget a vote on the treaty at all. Polls show that most Brits want a referendum but the government thinks it is in the UKs best interests not to allow a vote (ie the socialists and Marxists in the government dont want it so no one gets it).

But the regulation had close to 85% support of the citizenry. If it had not, the law would not have happened.

Bullshit again. Rigged polls and political fairy tales do not justify taking peoples guns by force.

New Zealand's gun laws:
Gun politics in New Zealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The philosophy of the new system was to control users, rather than firearms. ...

Special restrictions applied to restricted weapons and pistols, which needed to be registered. Self-defence was no longer a valid reason to have a pistol ...

After the Aramoana massacre in November 1990, John Banks, the Minister for Police, announced that the government would ban what he and others described as "Rambo-style" weapons and substantially tighten gun laws ...

So in New Zealand, banned guns never were officially 'confiscated', but simply banned by edict from the police minister! lol, but that is OK since he is appointed by a 'democratic' government? And what if they find someone with an illegal military looking rifle? Just ignore it? lol, of course not, they then confiscate that persons weapon.

Interesting that you dont see this as an obvious variation on confiscation.

As to the rest, anyone that wants to vet your lies can do so, but I think the two examples you gave already show how you lie but conceal your lies behind semantics and arbitrary statistical categories (like only looking at murders with a gun as opposed to all murders).

All gun owners need to be aware of what these lying gun grabbing fascists call 'reasonable gun control'.

 

[skookerasbil]

Ummmm........what is the point of this thread??

 

[skookerasbil]

This thread is gay............some of the limpwristed are talking as if we need to move to strike the second amendment from the US Constitution. AN exercise in group navel contemplation would be more productive

 

[JimBowie1958]

Ummmm........what is the point of this thread??

Come on, you know what the point is. Though not overtly stated, it tries to imply that it is too dangerous to have guns in society and so we should adopt 'reasonable' gun laws like they have in Australia.

Same old libtard bullshit.

 

[Rshermr]

So, I asked jimmy the following:

I simply look around the world and wonder why we have more gun deaths than any other industrialize nation. By at least 10 times.

To which Jimmy says:

Damn, jimmy, you forgot somalia and the congo. You really go after those industrialized countries.

So now Russia is no more industrialized than Somalia? That is bullshit and you know it. Russia is among the more advanced nations on the planet and heavily industrialized as well.




Meh, I was mistaken because I forgot how you gun grabbing whores are OK with homicide as long as it isnt done with a gun.

There are plenty of nations with a much higher homicide rate than the US if considering ALL homicides.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why are you gun grabbers OK with murdering people with a boot knife? Oh, that is right because innocent weaker people armed with a gun are able to defend themselves against the thugs that socialists and Marxists tend to hire to jack people up and often kill them. This goes back to the common ties between socialist parties and criminal organizations that have been around at least a century. Front organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The Guardian's long and fanatic history of supporting gun confiscation should be noted here.



Lol, do you know what a NONsemi-automatic gun is dumbass? A bolt action rifle is about it. Some gun grabbers claim that revolvers are semi-automatics since they automatically realign a fresh round for firing, lol.
And your gun grabbing whore of a columnist is lying, too, which is why you quote him.

Also, forcing people to turn in their property to be given 'fair market value for them' is a cheap dodge for confiscating the property since 'fair market value' drops to very little after a building is condemned (no matter how good shape it is actually in) or after a government has placed a ban on that kind of property, such as guns. Again, you try to conceal theft in the form of forced government 'buy backs' that do not give the owner compensation they freely agree to and have no choice about. Yes, that is legal THEFT, and legal only because the government does it. If a private citizen did that the government would put him on trial (unless the criminal was a socialist with connections, of course).

Here are the facts from a neutral (relatively) source on Australian gun laws.

Gun politics in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



So to own a Class A shotgun (hand reloading) or a RIMFIRE (basically a .22 round or smaller) bolt action rifle you have to have a "good reason" which translates into "if you have a friend in the government maybe you can get one, everyone else can forget about it" which is similar to the case for getting a concealed carry license in the state of Maryland a state who rarely ever agrees that anyone has a good reason to carry a gun concealed.

To own a Class B weapon (bolt action center fire and MUZZLE LODAING rifles), you have to show "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need", and why a class A weapon isnt suitable enough. So your far less likely to be able to buy or be allowed to own a bolt action rifle than a bolt action rimfire .22 rifle and those are practically banned.

Class C and D are strictly banned, and air powered handguns and handguns that are deactivated are allowed only to target shooters that can prove long membership in a state approved organization.

Any gun owner should look at this example of "reasonable gun regulation" according to this gun grabber and know what they are backing for us here in the US: effective gun confiscation and banning. We should also note how this gun grabbing whore lies yet again about only semi-autos being banned, apparently he thinks that the government allowing a few socialists and Marxist friends of the state to own guns makes such restrictions not a ban, lol.



Lol, it is moving in that direction and the people of Australia wont be able to do anything about it when the government moves into the kind of 'democracy' people enjoy in Venezuela and Cuba. Funny how you libtards are OK with a government as long as they claim to be a 'peoples democratic republic' etc, no matter how obvious the charade is.



Again, bullshit. The people could only have stopped it in theory, much like the people of the UK were supposed to get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and giving their sovereignty over to the EU, but did notget a vote on the treaty at all. Polls show that most Brits want a referendum but the government thinks it is in the UKs best interests not to allow a vote (ie the socialists and Marxists in the government dont want it so no one gets it).

But the regulation had close to 85% support of the citizenry. If it had not, the law would not have happened.

Bullshit again. Rigged polls and political fairy tales do not justify taking peoples guns by force.

New Zealand's gun laws:
Gun politics in New Zealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The philosophy of the new system was to control users, rather than firearms. ...

Special restrictions applied to restricted weapons and pistols, which needed to be registered. Self-defence was no longer a valid reason to have a pistol ...

After the Aramoana massacre in November 1990, John Banks, the Minister for Police, announced that the government would ban what he and others described as "Rambo-style" weapons and substantially tighten gun laws ...

So in New Zealand, banned guns never were officially 'confiscated', but simply banned by edict from the police minister! lol, but that is OK since he is appointed by a 'democratic' government? And what if they find someone with an illegal military looking rifle? Just ignore it? lol, of course not, they then confiscate that persons weapon.

Interesting that you dont see this as an obvious variation on confiscation.

As to the rest, anyone that wants to vet your lies can do so, but I think the two examples you gave already show how you lie but conceal your lies behind semantics and arbitrary statistical categories (like only looking at murders with a gun as opposed to all murders).

All gun owners need to be aware of what these lying gun grabbing fascists call 'reasonable gun control'.

Sorry, me boy. Lies are lies. Homicides are homicides. I was looking for the case where a guy goes into a school and murders a bunch of kids with a KNIFE. Nice try, asswipe. But no cigar.
And I know, as a dipshit, that you would feel that you should have more rights than the rest of the population. But most of the rest of the population believes you are wrong. And since in this country, the people tend to get what they want. So, if the people want to ban, say, high capacity mags, we will ban high capacity mags. And, the next day, there will still be a million high capacity mags out there. They will dwindle slowly, over time. And life will go on. And you will have to reload a couple extra times. And maybe a kid or two will live. And you will run around calling the rest of us nazis, or whatever. And, me boy, here is the thing. No one will care. Because you do not matter.

Your statement about other countries having more homicides, by the way, is A. Untrue, and B. Immaterial. Gun homicides, me poor ignorant deviant. That was what I and you were talking about. Trouble was, you lied, I did not.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So, I asked jimmy the following:

To which Jimmy says:

Damn, jimmy, you forgot somalia and the congo. You really go after those industrialized countries.

So now Russia is no more industrialized than Somalia? That is bullshit and you know it. Russia is among the more advanced nations on the planet and heavily industrialized as well.




Meh, I was mistaken because I forgot how you gun grabbing whores are OK with homicide as long as it isnt done with a gun.

There are plenty of nations with a much higher homicide rate than the US if considering ALL homicides.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why are you gun grabbers OK with murdering people with a boot knife? Oh, that is right because innocent weaker people armed with a gun are able to defend themselves against the thugs that socialists and Marxists tend to hire to jack people up and often kill them. This goes back to the common ties between socialist parties and criminal organizations that have been around at least a century. Front organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The Guardian's long and fanatic history of supporting gun confiscation should be noted here.



Lol, do you know what a NONsemi-automatic gun is dumbass? A bolt action rifle is about it. Some gun grabbers claim that revolvers are semi-automatics since they automatically realign a fresh round for firing, lol.
And your gun grabbing whore of a columnist is lying, too, which is why you quote him.

Also, forcing people to turn in their property to be given 'fair market value for them' is a cheap dodge for confiscating the property since 'fair market value' drops to very little after a building is condemned (no matter how good shape it is actually in) or after a government has placed a ban on that kind of property, such as guns. Again, you try to conceal theft in the form of forced government 'buy backs' that do not give the owner compensation they freely agree to and have no choice about. Yes, that is legal THEFT, and legal only because the government does it. If a private citizen did that the government would put him on trial (unless the criminal was a socialist with connections, of course).

Here are the facts from a neutral (relatively) source on Australian gun laws.

Gun politics in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



So to own a Class A shotgun (hand reloading) or a RIMFIRE (basically a .22 round or smaller) bolt action rifle you have to have a "good reason" which translates into "if you have a friend in the government maybe you can get one, everyone else can forget about it" which is similar to the case for getting a concealed carry license in the state of Maryland a state who rarely ever agrees that anyone has a good reason to carry a gun concealed.

To own a Class B weapon (bolt action center fire and MUZZLE LODAING rifles), you have to show "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need", and why a class A weapon isnt suitable enough. So your far less likely to be able to buy or be allowed to own a bolt action rifle than a bolt action rimfire .22 rifle and those are practically banned.

Class C and D are strictly banned, and air powered handguns and handguns that are deactivated are allowed only to target shooters that can prove long membership in a state approved organization.

Any gun owner should look at this example of "reasonable gun regulation" according to this gun grabber and know what they are backing for us here in the US: effective gun confiscation and banning. We should also note how this gun grabbing whore lies yet again about only semi-autos being banned, apparently he thinks that the government allowing a few socialists and Marxist friends of the state to own guns makes such restrictions not a ban, lol.



Lol, it is moving in that direction and the people of Australia wont be able to do anything about it when the government moves into the kind of 'democracy' people enjoy in Venezuela and Cuba. Funny how you libtards are OK with a government as long as they claim to be a 'peoples democratic republic' etc, no matter how obvious the charade is.



Again, bullshit. The people could only have stopped it in theory, much like the people of the UK were supposed to get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and giving their sovereignty over to the EU, but did notget a vote on the treaty at all. Polls show that most Brits want a referendum but the government thinks it is in the UKs best interests not to allow a vote (ie the socialists and Marxists in the government dont want it so no one gets it).



Bullshit again. Rigged polls and political fairy tales do not justify taking peoples guns by force.

New Zealand's gun laws:
Gun politics in New Zealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The philosophy of the new system was to control users, rather than firearms. ...

Special restrictions applied to restricted weapons and pistols, which needed to be registered. Self-defence was no longer a valid reason to have a pistol ...

After the Aramoana massacre in November 1990, John Banks, the Minister for Police, announced that the government would ban what he and others described as "Rambo-style" weapons and substantially tighten gun laws ...

So in New Zealand, banned guns never were officially 'confiscated', but simply banned by edict from the police minister! lol, but that is OK since he is appointed by a 'democratic' government? And what if they find someone with an illegal military looking rifle? Just ignore it? lol, of course not, they then confiscate that persons weapon.

Interesting that you dont see this as an obvious variation on confiscation.

As to the rest, anyone that wants to vet your lies can do so, but I think the two examples you gave already show how you lie but conceal your lies behind semantics and arbitrary statistical categories (like only looking at murders with a gun as opposed to all murders).

All gun owners need to be aware of what these lying gun grabbing fascists call 'reasonable gun control'.

Sorry, me boy. Lies are lies. Homicides are homicides. I was looking for the case where a guy goes into a school and murders a bunch of kids with a KNIFE. Nice try, asswipe. But no cigar.

Then you are more stupid than I thought. I found this in less than two minutes and there are multiple such events. Dumbass.

List of attacks related to primary schools - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I know, as a dipshit,

I really dont care if you are a dipshit.

that you would feel that you should have more rights than the rest of the population.

Not at all, you babling retarded monkey. I want to protect my rights and those of law abiding citizens from gun grabbing whores like you.

But most of the rest of the population believes you are wrong.

They dont, but even if they did, doesnt mean a single thing, **** face.

And since in this country, the people tend to get what they want. So, if the people want to ban, say, high capacity mags, we will ban high capacity mags. And, the next day, there will still be a million high capacity mags out there. They will dwindle slowly, over time. And life will go on. And you will have to reload a couple extra times.

It hasnt gone into law yet, dumbass.

And maybe a kid or two will live.

Why? You know this because.....you saw it spelled out in your Cheerios this morning? lol

And you will run around calling the rest of us nazis, or whatever. And, me boy, here is the thing. No one will care. Because you do not matter.

So now you think a single voter does not matter? Just like a ******* fascist bastard.

Your statement about other countries having more homicides, by the way, is A. Untrue,

No its not and I gave a link to a neutral source that has that data, unlike you quoting libtard blogs.

and B. Immaterial.

Only to gun gabbing fascists like you.

Gun homicides, me poor ignorant deviant. That was what I and you were talking about. Trouble was, you lied, I did not.

You lied repeatedly as there are plenty of advanced industrialized nations that have higher homicide rates than we do here in the USA. You want to talk only about murders that used guns, but it seems that for every gun murder reduced by gun control we end up with five more violent crimes, and two more murders using other weapons.

But that doesnt mattter to a brainless monkey-faced shit flinger like you, I know, that, but I am posting not for your sake, but that of others.

roflmao

 

[Rshermr]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
So, I asked jimmy the following:
Quote:
I simply look around the world and wonder why we have more gun deaths than any other industrialize nation. By at least 10 times.
To which Jimmy says:
Quote:
More bullshit. Russia, the Ukraine, the Baltic nations, Finland and more have far more gun related deaths than we do.
Damn, jimmy, you forgot somalia and the congo. You really go after those industrialized countries.
So now Russia is no more industrialized than Somalia? That is bullshit and you know it. Russia is among the more advanced nations on the planet and heavily industrialized as well.


Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Finland. .45 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #4 (high numbers because they include Suicide)
US 2.97 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #1
Ukrain .22 deaths per 100,000 Population, Ranks #84
Russian numbers are not there, but thought to be well under Ukrain.
So, See what I was saying. You were trying to mislead, eh, Jimmy. kinda dishonest. If you look at this source, you will find that when i said over 10 times as many, I was not exaggerating.
Meh, I was mistaken because I forgot how you gun grabbing whores are OK with homicide as long as it isnt done with a gun.

There are plenty of nations with a much higher homicide rate than the US if considering ALL homicides.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So, jimmy, pay attention, now. We were discussing gun laws. Wheather people off someone with a pipe or strangle them has no relevence. It is guns, me boy. Funny how you want to change the subject so quickly. But, maybe we should start a new thread about homicides useing knives. Ya think, dipshit.
Why are you gun grabbers OK with murdering people with a boot knife? Well, jimmy, that is obvious to anyone with actual brain activity. BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN NO MASS MURDERS IN OUR COUNTRY WITH BOOT KNIVES, DIPSHITOh, that is right because innocent weaker people armed with a gun are able to defend themselves against the thugs that socialists and Marxists tend to hire to jack people up and often kill them. This goes back to the common ties between socialist parties and criminal organizations that have been around at least a century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_o...mmunist_fronts

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | guardian.co.uk
The Guardian's long and fanatic history of supporting gun confiscation should be noted here.
And here, Jimmy the liar, since he can not attack the statistics, attacks one of the most well respected newspapers in the world. Jimmy, me poor ignorant gun nut, the stats did not come from the guardian. the guardian simply published them. get a grip.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Right. Show me a country, me boy, in this world, today, where guns are being confiscated. Among the 35 industrialized nations.
So, Jimmy says:
Quote:
How long do you think it takes to take away peoples guns? But the UK, Australia and New Zealand have stolen almost every one of their citizens rifles and handguns, to answer your stupid ass question.
So, lets check jimmy for lies again. One country at a time.

Australia. After another mass murder in the country, the Australian gov passed gun laws that made all semi automatic guns illegal. Including rifles, shotguns, and handguns. However, where jimmy said the guns were stolen. the gov paid market value plus 10%. I think that qualifies as a lie, jimmy? And, the law did not take almost every one of their citizens rifles and handguns. All non semiautomatic guns were not affected. Kind of another lie, eh jimmy?

Lol, do you know what a NONsemi-automatic gun is dumbass? Yup. I do indeed, me lying dipshit. Own a couple. They work well for hunting. And target shooting. Just not so well to kill a whole bunch of kids. Question is, do you want to admit you were lying, or not. I am guessing not, eh, jimmy.A bolt action rifle is about it. Some gun grabbers claim that revolvers are semi-automatics since they automatically realign a fresh round for firing, lol.
And your gun grabbing whore of a columnist is lying, too, which is why you quote him.
Now, that is funny. An accusation without proof. A proven liar, jimmy, saying someone else is a liar.

Also, forcing people to turn in their property to be given 'fair market value for them' is a cheap dodge for confiscating the property since 'fair market value' drops to very little after a building is condemned (no matter how good shape it is actually in) or after a government has placed a ban on that kind of property, such as guns. Again, you try to conceal theft in the form of forced governmentForced Government. Again, the will of the people is not considered by jimmy. Jimmy is twisting in the wind trying to justify his lies. Jimmy would like all to believe that the people of Australia do not have the right to control their own affairs. Rather an interesting thought process. Maybe we should ask them how to run our affairs. Jimmy, you are a mental giant. It is becoming more and more obvious. 'buy backs' that do not give the owner compensation they freely agree to and have no choice about. Yes, that is legal THEFT, and legal only because the government does it. If a private citizen did that the government would put him on trial (unless the criminal was a socialist with connections, of course).

Here are the facts from a neutral (relatively) source on Australian gun laws.

Gun politics in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories determined by the National Firearm Agreement with different levels of control. The categories are:
Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.
Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.
Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.
Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.
Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. ... This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of six months using club handguns, and a minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun.
So to own a Class A shotgun (hand reloading) or a RIMFIRE (basically a .22 round or smaller) bolt action rifle you have to have a "good reason" which translates into "if you have a friend in the government maybe you can get one, everyone else can forget about it" which is similar to the case for getting a concealed carry license in the state of Maryland a state who rarely ever agrees that anyone has a good reason to carry a gun concealed.

To own a Class B weapon (bolt action center fire and MUZZLE LODAING rifles), you have to show "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need", and why a class A weapon isnt suitable enough. So your far less likely to be able to buy or be allowed to own a bolt action rifle than a bolt action rimfire .22 rifle and those are practically banned.

Class C and D are strictly banned, and air powered handguns and handguns that are deactivated are allowed only to target shooters that can prove long membership in a state approved organization.

Any gun owner should look at this example of "reasonable gun regulation" according to this gun grabber and know what they are backing for us here in the US: effective gun confiscation and banning. We should also note how this gun grabbing whore lies yet again about only semi-autos being banned, apparently he thinks that the government allowing a few socialists and Marxist friends of the state to own guns makes such restrictions not a ban, lol.
Or, perhaps we should all be paranoid, like Jimmy. No one is coming to get your guns. But, maybe jimmy just likes to see the ammo companies make lots of money. Or the gun companies. Because Jimmy wants you all to arm up so you can fight the government. Yes, indeed. Because, you see, maybe jimmy is making some good bucks selling gun clips. Or maybe he just gets paid by the good old NRA. But, back to reality, folks. I do not know, nor do I care, what Jimmy does. Because jimmy is just a paranoid gun nut making nut case accusations. Maybe he just has a small dick.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
Now, it is important to note that Australia is not a dictatorship.
Moving toward dictatorship??? Your proof of that stupid statement. Oh, that is Jimmy speeking. And that is simply crap coming out of his mouth. As usual.
Lol, it is moving in that direction and the people of Australia wont be able to do anything about it when the government moves into the kind of 'democracy' people enjoy in Venezuela and Cuba. Funny how you libtards are OK with a government as long as they claim to be a 'peoples democratic republic' etc, no matter how obvious the charade is.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
The people of the country could have stopped the law.
Again, bullshit. The people could only have stopped it in theory, much like the people of the UK were supposed to get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and giving their sovereignty over to the EU, but did notget a vote on the treaty at all. Polls show that most Brits want a referendum but the government thinks it is in the UKs best interests not to allow a vote (ie the socialists and Marxists in the government dont want it so no one gets it).

Quote: Originally Posted by Rshermr
But the regulation had close to 85% support of the citizenry. If it had not, the law would not have happened.

Bullshit again. Rigged polls and political fairy tales do not justify taking peoples guns by force.

So you say. Without proof. From the mouth of a liar. So, what if it was 54% that wanted the new gun laws. I assume that that would not count, in your pea brain, because somehow the majority does not have a say. You see, rational people actually think that the people of Australia have the right to do what they want. If the gov says they do not, we would not much like it, with justification. So, you are making an argument that the people were harmed when the people think that they were NOT harmed. Rather odd thought process you have.

New Zealand's gun laws:
Gun politics in New Zealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
The philosophy of the new system was to control users, rather than firearms. ...

Special restrictions applied to restricted weapons and pistols, which needed to be registered. Self-defence was no longer a valid reason to have a pistol ...

After the Aramoana massacre in November 1990, John Banks, the Minister for Police, announced that the government would ban what he and others described as "Rambo-style" weapons and substantially tighten gun laws ...
So in New Zealand, banned guns never were officially 'confiscated', but simply banned by edict from the police minister! lol, but that is OK since he is appointed by a 'democratic' government? And what if they find someone with an illegal military looking rifle? Just ignore it? lol, of course not, they then confiscate that persons weapon.

Interesting that you dont see this as an obvious variation on confiscation.
No guns were ever confiscated. EVER. So, yes, dipshit. I do not see not confiscated as confiscated. Sorry you have a problem understanding. Now, you said almost all of the guns were stolen from the citizenry. Now, that is interesting. Want to admit your lie, or should we assume that it is a variation of truth?? Nothing was stolen is different from almost all were stolen. Get it yet???

Ah, but those that are not paranoid, as you are, would not feel that way. So, you stated that almost all of the guns were stollen from the citizens. Where is that again???? And interesting that you are using wickipedia. The editable source for your information. Rather than the official government source provided.


As to the rest, anyone that wants to vet your lies can do so, but I think the two examples you gave already show how you lie but conceal your lies behind semantics and arbitrary statistical categories (like only looking at murders with a gun as opposed to all murders). Are we talking about boot knives, which are not used in mass killings, or guns, me poor mentally challenged dipshit
Ah, but I did not lie. What I said, I stand behind. If I made any mistakes, they were honest ones. Now, jimmy, pay close attention. Saying that there were three countries where the gov stole almost all of the citizens guns. Now that is a lie. See the difference, dipshit.

All gun owners need to be aware of what these lying gun grabbing fascists call 'reasonable gun control'.You see, me boy, that would be your opinion. And the opinion of a liar is of little concern.
__________________

 

[CMike]

GUNS IN HOME KILLS FAMILY OF FIVE.
15-year-old boy suspected of killing parents, 3 kids in New Mexico home
15-year-old boy suspected of killing parents, 3 kids in New Mexico home | Fox News

Again, guns in the home kills family instead of protecting family by a good kid. All law abiding citizens should under go an psychiatric evaluations before allowed to buy guns. Again a assault weapon involved.

The gun didn't kill anyone. The 15 year old did.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

That's strange. I can't remember a time in my life where guns were not a part of any of my homes and yet not one person was attacked or murdered by those inanimate weapons? Am I missing something? Are there now walking and talking guns capable of killing on their own?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

GUNS IN HOME KILLS FAMILY OF FIVE.
15-year-old boy suspected of killing parents, 3 kids in New Mexico home
15-year-old boy suspected of killing parents, 3 kids in New Mexico home | Fox News

Again, guns in the home kills family instead of protecting family by a good kid. All law abiding citizens should under go an psychiatric evaluations before allowed to buy guns. Again a assault weapon involved.

Why is it that none of the disturbed and evil men, who steal guns, then go and kill movie-goers and children in school, has ever been identified as a conservative NRA member?

Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat ~ Muslim

Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals

Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~ Registered Democrat

Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal

Connecticut School Shooter- ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians

Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal Democrats.

INTERESTING, isn't it?

Maybe it's just the Democrats who shouldn't have guns!

 

[Rshermr]

And from the Eloquent mind of Jimmy, the following piece of drivel.

You lied repeatedly as there are plenty of advanced industrialized nations that have higher homicide rates than we do here in the USA.

I know this is dificult for you to understand. but I did not discuss homicides. It was gun deaths, dipshit.

You want to talk only about murders that used guns, but it seems that for every gun murder reduced by gun control we end up with five more violent crimes, and two more murders using other weapons.

And that would be your opinion. Funny one though. One less gun murder causes five more murders by other means.

Then you are more stupid than I thought. I found this in less than two minutes and there are multiple such events. Dumbass.

List of attacks related to primary schools - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yep, there was a bombing in the US in the 1800's, and an accidental killing of 94 in Angola when a MIG hit a school. But, if you look at the stats from the 1960's forward in the US, almost all of the killings were by gun. Odd cases of cars driven onto play fields, but mostly guns.
This list is an incomplete list of school deaths worldwide. But, maybe we should look at really important things like boot knives. There was probably a killing using one, which would completely negate the need to discuss gun regulations, in the pea brain of Jimmy.

Uh, jimmy, I think you may want to go back to paragraph 6, sentence 2, of my response. You may want to comment on the comma there. Dipshit.

 

[Rshermr]

GUNS IN HOME KILLS FAMILY OF FIVE.
15-year-old boy suspected of killing parents, 3 kids in New Mexico home
15-year-old boy suspected of killing parents, 3 kids in New Mexico home | Fox News

Again, guns in the home kills family instead of protecting family by a good kid. All law abiding citizens should under go an psychiatric evaluations before allowed to buy guns. Again a assault weapon involved.

Why is it that none of the disturbed and evil men, who steal guns, then go and kill movie-goers and children in school, has ever been identified as a conservative NRA member?

Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat ~ Muslim

Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals

Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~ Registered Democrat

Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal

Connecticut School Shooter- ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians

Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal Democrats.

INTERESTING, isn't it?

Maybe it's just the Democrats who shouldn't have guns!

What is interesting is that there is no reason to believe anything you just said, as you provided no sources. Odd that you think anyone should believe your post, without any support for what you say. To me, it would be interesting to explore. But based on the lack of proof, it is too big a waste of time.

 

[Againsheila]

Why was the gun and ammunition in reach of the child in the first place?

Because most normal people dont expect their children to shoot hem in cold blood?

Doesn't matter what they expect. You have guns, you lock them up.

 

[thanatos144]

I am actually much more interested in what has made you so paranoid. So, again, 20 elementry school kids, and you worry about not having access to a 30 round magazine. Or being able to buy guns without background checks. Seems obvious enough that your priorities are really fucked up.

Why would you want to deny a law abiding legal gun owning citizen's of a 30 round magazine or even a thousand round magazine if one did exist ? Are you grouping law abiding citizens in with criminals, and if you are, what right do you have in doing this? Is there evidence that you have in which suggest that a law abiding gun owning citizen is a threat to the people, communities and government in this nation ? No you don't have, so why group them altogether unless it is for pure political motives and/or agenda's being sought after by the left or democrat politicians along with the dem/liberal voters in this way?

So you want to tell me you can attest that all who buy, say, 30 round mags, are trust worthy, that they will keep them securely stored, that they will never be stolen. If you attest to that, you are a fool. Because these items are stollen, and sold. A good friend of mine is making good money, again, selling to paranoid gun nuts. Almost entirely high capacity mags. And laughing his ass off.

So, do I believe they will be secure. no. No more than the guns of the Connecticut child killer's mother. So, want to explain how that worked???

I attest you are a fascist pig who doesnt need to know why I want 30 round drum magazines.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

One of the stupidest OP's ever!

It's like writing about a Ted Bundy murder, "Crowbar kills woman"

 

[Rshermr]

Why would you want to deny a law abiding legal gun owning citizen's of a 30 round magazine or even a thousand round magazine if one did exist ? Are you grouping law abiding citizens in with criminals, and if you are, what right do you have in doing this? Is there evidence that you have in which suggest that a law abiding gun owning citizen is a threat to the people, communities and government in this nation ? No you don't have, so why group them altogether unless it is for pure political motives and/or agenda's being sought after by the left or democrat politicians along with the dem/liberal voters in this way?

So you want to tell me you can attest that all who buy, say, 30 round mags, are trust worthy, that they will keep them securely stored, that they will never be stolen. If you attest to that, you are a fool. Because these items are stollen, and sold. A good friend of mine is making good money, again, selling to paranoid gun nuts. Almost entirely high capacity mags. And laughing his ass off.

So, do I believe they will be secure. no. No more than the guns of the Connecticut child killer's mother. So, want to explain how that worked???

I attest you are a fascist pig who doesnt need to know why I want 30 round drum magazines.

And i attest that you are a congenital idiot for thinking I care why you want a 30 round magazine.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Unsecured guns in the home...

A kid with "anger issues..."

Shot most of the family while they slept...

Laid in wait for the father...

Hard to defend against that shit...

It's the guns fault. Everyone knows that.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Why would you want to deny a law abiding legal gun owning citizen's of a 30 round magazine or even a thousand round magazine if one did exist ? Are you grouping law abiding citizens in with criminals, and if you are, what right do you have in doing this? Is there evidence that you have in which suggest that a law abiding gun owning citizen is a threat to the people, communities and government in this nation ? No you don't have, so why group them altogether unless it is for pure political motives and/or agenda's being sought after by the left or democrat politicians along with the dem/liberal voters in this way?

So you want to tell me you can attest that all who buy, say, 30 round mags, are trust worthy, that they will keep them securely stored, that they will never be stolen. If you attest to that, you are a fool. Because these items are stollen, and sold. A good friend of mine is making good money, again, selling to paranoid gun nuts. Almost entirely high capacity mags. And laughing his ass off.

So, do I believe they will be secure. no. No more than the guns of the Connecticut child killer's mother. So, want to explain how that worked???

I attest you are a fascist pig who doesnt need to know why I want 30 round drum magazines.

Some people just hate having to reload so damn often. That's a good enough reason for me.