CDZ Law abiding citizens should be able to carry a gun, open or concealed in any state...

[danielpalos]

Wrong; our Government secures our Rights; it Must function do so. Our Second Amendment, secures that right for the several States.

The government is THE PEOPLE

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated (according to Government) militia of the whole People are necessary to the security of a free State, and may not be Infringed as a result.

right so the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you are constantly contradicting yourself

the right of well regulated militia of the People. i don't contradict myself; you merely have lousy reading comprehension.

THE second does not say the right of the militia

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it has, even with more guns being acquired and possessed.

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

prove that

prove that more guns means less crime.

I never said that

You said there would be more violence in Chicago without the gun laws so you prove it

more guns and less crime must be due to gun control laws not more more guns.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You don't eve know what the law of large numbers is

you don't even know you have nothing but fallacy to work with.

you know just because you say something doesn't mean it's true

it is if i am making sure, the other guy resorts to fallacy for his Cause, first.

I have used no fallacy

It is a fact that states with the most restrictive gun laws have more crime than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

the law of large numbers claims you have to be full of fallacy.

OK so then use the law of large numbers to prove that states with the harshest gun laws don't have higher murder rates than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it has, even with more guns being acquired and possessed.

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

prove that

prove that more guns means less crime.

I never said that

You said there would be more violence in Chicago without the gun laws so you prove it

yes, there would be more violence in Chicago or the US, without gun control laws. Prohibition is proof enough.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The government is THE PEOPLE

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated (according to Government) militia of the whole People are necessary to the security of a free State, and may not be Infringed as a result.

right so the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you are constantly contradicting yourself

the right of well regulated militia of the People. i don't contradict myself; you merely have lousy reading comprehension.

THE second does not say the right of the militia

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

 

[danielpalos]

you don't even know you have nothing but fallacy to work with.

you know just because you say something doesn't mean it's true

it is if i am making sure, the other guy resorts to fallacy for his Cause, first.

I have used no fallacy

It is a fact that states with the most restrictive gun laws have more crime than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

the law of large numbers claims you have to be full of fallacy.

OK so then use the law of large numbers to prove that states with the harshest gun laws don't have higher murder rates than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

it is about population density not guns.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

prove that

prove that more guns means less crime.

I never said that

You said there would be more violence in Chicago without the gun laws so you prove it

yes, there would be more violence in Chicago or the US, without gun control laws. Prohibition is proof enough.

Prohibition had nothing to do with guns

 

[danielpalos]

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated (according to Government) militia of the whole People are necessary to the security of a free State, and may not be Infringed as a result.

right so the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you are constantly contradicting yourself

the right of well regulated militia of the People. i don't contradict myself; you merely have lousy reading comprehension.

THE second does not say the right of the militia

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

 

[danielpalos]

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

prove that

prove that more guns means less crime.

I never said that

You said there would be more violence in Chicago without the gun laws so you prove it

yes, there would be more violence in Chicago or the US, without gun control laws. Prohibition is proof enough.

Prohibition had nothing to do with guns

yes, it did.

 

[Skull Pilot]

you know just because you say something doesn't mean it's true

it is if i am making sure, the other guy resorts to fallacy for his Cause, first.

I have used no fallacy

It is a fact that states with the most restrictive gun laws have more crime than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

the law of large numbers claims you have to be full of fallacy.

OK so then use the law of large numbers to prove that states with the harshest gun laws don't have higher murder rates than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

it is about population density not guns.

Murder rate are stated per 100,000 so density population density is accounted for

 

[Skull Pilot]

right so the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you are constantly contradicting yourself

the right of well regulated militia of the People. i don't contradict myself; you merely have lousy reading comprehension.

THE second does not say the right of the militia

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

 

[jillian]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

why would you put this in the CDZ?

seems you violated the rules of the forum when you called smart people who want reasonable controls "anti-gunners"

you should probably keep your posts where they belong.

just saying.

 

[danielpalos]

it is if i am making sure, the other guy resorts to fallacy for his Cause, first.

I have used no fallacy

It is a fact that states with the most restrictive gun laws have more crime than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

the law of large numbers claims you have to be full of fallacy.

OK so then use the law of large numbers to prove that states with the harshest gun laws don't have higher murder rates than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

it is about population density not guns.

Murder rate are stated per 100,000 so density population density is accounted for

per number of guns in that population density. the right wing prefers to plead, so specially.

 

[rightwinger]

legal gun owners are subject to State gun control laws.

no fucking shit Sherlock

and legal gun owners are less likely to become criminals not more likely simply because they own guns

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And the gun control has not reduced the crime

Hard to say....crime has been on a decline for the last twenty years

I think gun ownership is no longer a rite of passage for many families. I remember growing up and every kid got a BB or pellet gun. Teaching your kid to shoot was as common as teaching him to ride a bike

Now, the kid would rather play video games

 

[2aguy]

legal gun owners are less likely to be criminals not more

legal gun owners are subject to State gun control laws.

no fucking shit Sherlock

and legal gun owners are less likely to become criminals not more likely simply because they own guns

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

 

[Skull Pilot]

I have used no fallacy

It is a fact that states with the most restrictive gun laws have more crime than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

the law of large numbers claims you have to be full of fallacy.

OK so then use the law of large numbers to prove that states with the harshest gun laws don't have higher murder rates than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

it is about population density not guns.

Murder rate are stated per 100,000 so density population density is accounted for

per number of guns in that population density. the right wing prefers to plead, so specially.

no it's per-capita
It has nothing to do with the number of guns since you only need one gun to murder a person

 

[2aguy]

no fucking shit Sherlock

and legal gun owners are less likely to become criminals not more likely simply because they own guns

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And the gun control has not reduced the crime

Hard to say....crime has been on a decline for the last twenty years

I think gun ownership is no longer a rite of passage for many families. I remember growing up and every kid got a BB or pellet gun. Teaching your kid to shoot was as common as teaching him to ride a bike

Now, the kid would rather play video games

Video games with people shooting guns.....

 

[2aguy]

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And the gun control has not reduced the crime

yes, it has, even with more guns being acquired and possessed.

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

Yeah...except states with little to no moronic gun control laws have really low gun murder rates......according to you that isn't possible...

 

[2aguy]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

why would you put this in the CDZ?

seems you violated the rules of the forum when you called smart people who want reasonable controls "anti-gunners"

you should probably keep your posts where they belong.

just saying.

No...that is accurate...there are people who do not believe anyone should own or carry a gun...they are accurately described as anti gun. And please...list reasonable controls...since you guys always say those words and then move on. List what you believe to be reasonable controls and then explain how they act to stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.......we are still waiting......

 

[rightwinger]

legal gun owners are subject to State gun control laws.

no fucking shit Sherlock

and legal gun owners are less likely to become criminals not more likely simply because they own guns

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer