NRA vs Chris Christie: Christie Defeated by Logic

[JoeB131]

Joe, the King had plenty of power back during the revolutionary era. Why was the list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence specifically addressed to the King? Why didn't they make any mention of the Parliament? He was the last great King of Britain and Ireland until the rise of the 2nd British Empire in 1783.

Same reason why British ships are called "HMS Whatever" today. Just because they are called "Her Majesty's Ship" does not mean she calls where they are sent, dumbass.

The British Monarchy held no real power since Queen Anne at the beginning of the century.

George III held no real power and was actually institutionalized for much of his reign because of various maladies, including Prophyria.

I'm sure they never covered this with you in Home Skule. Probably too busy teaching you about talking snakes.

Actually, King George had similar power as our president does now, believe it or not. There are records stating he submitted bills for consideration to the Parliament, who by that time had not taken full control of the governance yet. He still had power over the troops, too (which is how he was able to land troops and ships on Colonial shores during the war). It wasn't until 1783 that Parliament had taken full control. You can keep insulting me if you'd like, but it shows you for what you are.

I'm sure that's what you learned in Home Skule... but it just ain't true.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Logic works every time.

NRA vs Chris Christie: Christie Defeated by Logic - YouTube

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

Why do IDIOTS keep inserting red herrings? We are all aware that they have lower gun violence, but they do not have lower violent crime rates, nor do they have 0 gun violence.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Same reason why British ships are called "HMS Whatever" today. Just because they are called "Her Majesty's Ship" does not mean she calls where they are sent, dumbass.

The British Monarchy held no real power since Queen Anne at the beginning of the century.

George III held no real power and was actually institutionalized for much of his reign because of various maladies, including Prophyria.

I'm sure they never covered this with you in Home Skule. Probably too busy teaching you about talking snakes.

Actually, King George had similar power as our president does now, believe it or not. There are records stating he submitted bills for consideration to the Parliament, who by that time had not taken full control of the governance yet. He still had power over the troops, too (which is how he was able to land troops and ships on Colonial shores during the war). It wasn't until 1783 that Parliament had taken full control. You can keep insulting me if you'd like, but it shows you for what you are.

I'm sure that's what you learned in Home Skule... but it just ain't true.

Says you. And by the way, I actually went to and graduated from High School. So you can ditch that "home-skule" bullshit, numbnuts.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Logic works every time.

NRA vs Chris Christie: Christie Defeated by Logic - YouTube

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

Why do IDIOTS keep inserting red herrings? We are all aware that they have lower gun violence, but they do not have lower violent crime rates, nor do they have 0 gun violence.

The Canucks, like the Brits, have a much lower murder rate than the USA, per 100,000.

UK 1.2
Can 1.6
USA 4.8

All countries have violence, but we have MUCH more of it than the other two.

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

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

Why do IDIOTS keep inserting red herrings? We are all aware that they have lower gun violence, but they do not have lower violent crime rates, nor do they have 0 gun violence.

The Canucks, like the Brits, have a much lower murder rate than the USA, per 100,000.

UK 1.2
Can 1.6
USA 4.8

All countries have violence, but we have MUCH more of it than the other two.

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

The key words are VIOLENT CRIMES

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why do IDIOTS keep inserting red herrings? We are all aware that they have lower gun violence, but they do not have lower violent crime rates, nor do they have 0 gun violence.

The Canucks, like the Brits, have a much lower murder rate than the USA, per 100,000.

UK 1.2
Can 1.6
USA 4.8

All countries have violence, but we have MUCH more of it than the other two.

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

The key words are VIOLENT CRIMES

I would suggest MURDER is a violent crime, and the UK and Canada have far less of it per capital than the USA.

You cannot get away from the numbers, bigrebnc.

 

[velvtacheeze]

Logic works every time.

NRA vs Chris Christie: Christie Defeated by Logic - YouTube

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

Why do IDIOTS keep inserting red herrings? We are all aware that they have lower gun violence, but they do not have lower violent crime rates, nor do they have 0 gun violence.

Our goal isn't zero gun violence. We know this is not attainable, so why do you insert this red herring into the debate? You must be an idiot.

And they do indeed have lower violent crime rates. You sound like the old mayor of DC who once said something like "if it weren't for all the murders, our crime rate would be just like any other city" , in other words, you sound like a buffoon to me.

The next mass shooting will be entirely the GOP's fault, after they nixed the latest gun legislation.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

Why do IDIOTS keep inserting red herrings? We are all aware that they have lower gun violence, but they do not have lower violent crime rates, nor do they have 0 gun violence.

The Canucks, like the Brits, have a much lower murder rate than the USA, per 100,000.

UK 1.2
Can 1.6
USA 4.8

All countries have violence, but we have MUCH more of it than the other two.

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

Nice try. South Africa has twice the gun homicide rate we do.

Murders with firearms statistics - countries compared - NationMaster Crime

Just give it up.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Canucks, like the Brits, have a much lower murder rate than the USA, per 100,000.

UK 1.2
Can 1.6
USA 4.8

All countries have violence, but we have MUCH more of it than the other two.

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

The key words are VIOLENT CRIMES

I would suggest MURDER is a violent crime, and the UK and Canada have far less of it per capital than the USA.

You cannot get away from the numbers, bigrebnc.

Numbers you no doubt spun to suit your argument Jake.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are talking about Canada, UK, and USA. Regardless, per population, we have 300% and 400% the murder rate in the USA compared to the UK and Canada.

Facts are facts.

You seem confused, so here are some things for you to consider, TK.

Canada Canada classifies homicides, attempted murder, all assaults, all sexual offences, abduction and robbery as violent crime.[8]

United Kingdom Violent crime rates in the UK. Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.[11]

United States The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report (FBI UCR) counts four categories of crime as violent crimes: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.[13]

Violent crime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[logical4u]

[quo

The Japanese are also taught (gasp, choke) MORALS! Do you think that might have something to do with "gun violence" in this country, where "morals" are considered to be "forcing" religion? If the respect for life is rejected (abortion is "good", killing old people is "good", experimenting on human life is "good"), how can you expect the people that are brought up with those attitudes to act in a respectful manner towards LIFE?

The Japanese aren't any more or less moral than we are. They are actually LESS religous. They play all sort of violent video games and if you want to see how "moral" they are, I'd suggest you type in "hentai" some day in your google just for laughs. Abortion in Japan is legal, and their birth rate is actually lower than ours.

They do have a politeness, but that's a culture, not a moral view. As Fred Thompson once pointed out on a Law and Order episode, "The Japanese do not have a close perosnal relationship with the word 'no'." And they don't have the same sense of sexual equality that we do.

But, no, it isn't a moral issue.

Its that your average Japanese doesn't own a gun, and has no need for one.

Your average American has no need for one, either. But we let them have them anyway and hilarity ensues.

After the "tsunami", how many looters were arrested? The Japanese have a more moral society. As far as their sexual habits go, I am not a student. I did not mention "religion" in reference to "morals". I just pointed out that in "this" country, the libs/progressives/dems/socialists/communists all want to cry that "morals" = "religion".

 

[freedombecki]

[
Based on Hitler's removal of guns and articles of artillery, he merely simplified the process of using big government power to commit his world-famous genocide of 6,000,000 jews.

Hitler relaxed Germany's gun laws, which were pretty strict after Versailles and the Weimar government. The guy who took all the German guns away was Eisenhower after the war.

[
That's the way it goes when you disarm the people you want to kill. Get smart, dammit Joe. Stop proffering propaganda against the common man with anecdotes of small misuses. There's a price to pay for freedom, but you can minimize that with good police work, which we saw with the apprehension and disabling of two terrorists bent on destruction of other human beings.

These aren't "anecdotes". they are cold hard facts.

According to the FBI, there were only 201 homicides with guns that were ruled "justifiable"- that a felon was killed by someone in the commission of a crime.

In that same year, there were 11,000 gun homicides and 16,000 gun suicides.

As far as the crazy shit that you need that gun to fight the "Gummit", the fact is, the Government will have tanks and bombers and drones and it's always going to be kind of a one-sided fight. Just ask the Tsaranaev Brothers how their war against the government went. It lasted all of four days. (Psssst. They lost!)

[
The same goes for mental patients. 98% of them can be ministered to outside Bedlam's walls. 2% of them will kill somebody else out of the small percentage who refuse to take their medication for their condition. We could stop it by spending several trillion dollars on full care facilities for all of them. Unfortunately, some of our society's best human beings are mentally ill, but able to live out 100 years without harming themselves or others with or without medication.

I'm all for sane, humane treatment of the mentally ill. They just shouldn't be able to buy guns. Why you think they should be able to is beyond comprehension.

[
Not every single little thing is significant enough to pass a law over. Why spend $80 trillion so that $1,000 in damages per decade are stopped? It's overkill, that's why. Our founders knew the rules they laid out would work to do what is best for the most. The only thing we've really had to work out were the kinks caused by differences of opinion between northern factories and their southern suppliers of cotton for making America's clothing for hundreds of years. (beginning long prior to 1776).

Arming regular people is the best cure for deterring the evil of wicked men to kill innocents.

The founders created a screwed up document that even our own government is telling other countries not to copy. Electoral Colleges and slaves being 3/5th of a white person... that was screwed up. So was writing a rule about militias that implied that any yahoo has a right to a gun without question.

No big government is desired because it kills the freedoms our forbears died procuring from a government so big it was removed from America, where it sent its immediate undesirables to fight the wolves by night and work in glass factories producing fabulous things for the wealthy from America's rich raw resources. The wolves were our problem. The want of something for nothing was there. After a couple of hundred years, hard work forged a pragmatic people fed up to the gills with being used by big government.

Yet you want us to trash all we know, all we have been through, and every bit of human freedom to submit to big government run by do-gooders today, but trust me, tomorrow's generation never binds itself to what you want for them. Submissive people could get sucked in again by a Jew-hating overlord using the same methodology your people are using today--Alinsky's model of total control over other people--to kill dissenters by passing laws to get anybody who crosses the central powerful government. There you have it, history repeating itself with the great Bolshevik revolution which was designed to free the common man of the Czar, but wound up killing a hundred million worker-dissenters who got tired of the long lines waiting on products incentiveless people haphazardly provided, if at all.

Our system now has or used to have a discussion table. You have an out-of-control administration that writes its own rules as it goes, and they don't match the constitutional power of giving Congress the administration of funds from the treasury when President Obama jumps up and down over the Treasurer to write checks for half a billion every other day to his contributors' failed businesses such as Solyndra, where this quid-pro-quo crap deal disenfranchised 1100 workers in Fremont California when the grifters Obama represented made of with the half a billion to take care of themselves with no thought whatever for the 1100 workers afflicted by sudden dismissal and lockout, their security expropriated by big government wheeling and dealing.

Good grief. Have you no mercy on the common man, Joe, to let this gross misuse of power go down? Is that why you don't want men to have guns in America, so they cannot do anything to go out in the field and shoot a deer to feed their family who no longer has a job?

Ew, gross!

 

[OriginalShroom]

Logic works every time.

NRA vs Chris Christie: Christie Defeated by Logic - YouTube

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

If you would rather live under UK, Canadian, or Australian laws, please remember that you are more than free to move there.

You are even able, if they will accept you, become a citizen of the country where you would be more comfortable under their laws.

 

[velvtacheeze]

Logic works every time.

NRA vs Chris Christie: Christie Defeated by Logic - YouTube

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

If you would rather live under UK, Canadian, or Australian laws, please remember that you are more than free to move there.

You are even able, if they will accept you, become a citizen of the country where you would be more comfortable under their laws.

No, I'm not free to move there. Are you nutters ever right about anything?

 

[OriginalShroom]

Using the wiki link that Jake supplied, this is interesting..

In the UK, In 2010/11, 31 people per 1000 interviewed reported being a victim of violent crime in the 12 preceding months.

Meanwhile in the U.S. In 2009 there were 16.9 victimizations per 1000 persons aged 12 and over.

It would appear that the UK is nearly twice as violent as the U.S. . I wonder if that is because in the UK, the violent criminals know that their victims will be unarmed while that is not the case in the U.S.?

 

[OriginalShroom]

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

If you would rather live under UK, Canadian, or Australian laws, please remember that you are more than free to move there.

You are even able, if they will accept you, become a citizen of the country where you would be more comfortable under their laws.

No, I'm not free to move there. Are you nutters ever right about anything?

You are forbidden by law to move to one of the countries you like??

Why?

Are you a convicted felon?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Using the wiki link that Jake supplied, this is interesting..

In the UK, In 2010/11, 31 people per 1000 interviewed reported being a victim of violent crime in the 12 preceding months.

Meanwhile in the U.S. In 2009 there were 16.9 victimizations per 1000 persons aged 12 and over.

It would appear that the UK is nearly twice as violent as the U.S. . I wonder if that is because in the UK, the violent criminals know that their victims will be unarmed while that is not the case in the U.S.?

At least you are reading. Go above and see the comparisons of crime reporting, which will account for your misunderstanding of the rates.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The UK , Canada and Australia all have stricter gun laws, and lower amounts of gun violence. In the US, where guns are ubiquitous, so is gun violence.

If you would rather live under UK, Canadian, or Australian laws, please remember that you are more than free to move there.

You are even able, if they will accept you, become a citizen of the country where you would be more comfortable under their laws.

No, I'm not free to move there. Are you nutters ever right about anything?

As far as I know, you can expatriate anytime you wish. Our airports still work, and there are plenty to choose from, countries too. If you don't like it here, you can get the hell outta dodge. Nobody's stopping you, buddy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

TK, you are responding to velvtacheeze, but I must be in your mind. Do you have a mancrush on me?

 

[TemplarKormac]

TK, you are responding to velvtacheeze, but I must be in your mind. Do you have a mancrush on me?

You wish.

However, I do regularly crush your arguments. Care to go a few rounds? Besides, that comment sounded like something you would make anyhow.