Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.

[Yousaidwhat]

Yes, he is intellectually dishonest. The UK doesn't have so many guns, but they have just as many suicides. They just kill themselves other ways

You don't like the stats????? Too ******* bad.......We are a very violent country with a very infantile wish to constantly be at war with one another.

Maybe we can address this infantile behavior without having to disarm law abiding citizens.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That's your opinion

In my opinion the risk is worth it.

The Parents of the kids slaughtered at Sandy Hook disagree. Let's see what a jury decides after they see the autopsy and crime scene photos.

I really don't care if they agree or disagree.

People whose kids drown in pools might disagree that pools are safe too.

None of that has anything to do with me. I don't have kids and I am not going to go on a shooting spree so if I own one gun or one hundred it's none of anyone's ******* business

 

[Rustic]

Yes, he is intellectually dishonest. The UK doesn't have so many guns, but they have just as many suicides. They just kill themselves other ways

You don't like the stats????? Too ******* bad.......We are a very violent country with a very infantile wish to constantly be at war with one another.

Maybe we can address this infantile behavior without having to disarm law abiding citizens.

Firearms have nothing to do with violent behavior in this country, that behavior is there with or without the firearm. Progressives need to stop making excuses for bad behavior if they are to be taken seriously… LOL

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Yes, he is intellectually dishonest. The UK doesn't have so many guns, but they have just as many suicides. They just kill themselves other ways

You don't like the stats????? Too ******* bad.......We are a very violent country with a very infantile wish to constantly be at war with one another.

Maybe we can address this infantile behavior without having to disarm law abiding citizens.

Firearms have nothing to do with violent behavior in this country, that behavior is there with or without the firearm. Progressives need to stop making excuses for bad behavior if they are to be taken seriously… LOL

You and I both know this.

What is the ulterior motive besides disarming the populous?

 

[Rustic]

Yes, he is intellectually dishonest. The UK doesn't have so many guns, but they have just as many suicides. They just kill themselves other ways

You don't like the stats????? Too ******* bad.......We are a very violent country with a very infantile wish to constantly be at war with one another.

Maybe we can address this infantile behavior without having to disarm law abiding citizens.

Firearms have nothing to do with violent behavior in this country, that behavior is there with or without the firearm. Progressives need to stop making excuses for bad behavior if they are to be taken seriously… LOL

You and I both know this.

What is the ulterior motive besides disarming the populous?

Everyone is pretty much set in their ways... One side or the other will have to force their will on the other.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

The peoples right to keep (own) and bear arms shall not be infringed

The militia does not have any rights the PEOPLE hold the right to keep and bear arms

Just because you say something doesn't make it so.

in March 2007 the federal appeals court overturned that ruling, striking down the D.C. gun law. Judge Lawrence Silberman wrote for the 2-1 majority:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (2007): The Amendment does not protect “the right of militiamen to keep and bear arms,” but rather “the right of the people.” The operative clause, properly read, protects the ownership and use of weaponry beyond that needed to preserve the state militias.

Court precedents can be overridden. Now that Scalia is being ass raped by demons in Hell, we can get this stupidity overturned pretty quickly.

Oops, the Militia Amendment is about Militias again...

What is the phrase American's use?

Judicial Activism.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

So you have no legal precedent to quote that says people do not have a right to own firearms but I have a Federal Appeals court decision that says they do

If I were you I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Supreme Court to shit can the second amendment. But I do encourage you to try

Again, the Second Amendment is an idea whose time has come and gone.

Now, in 1787, before we had professional armies and police forces, when hunting was necessary for survival, when you still had roaming bands of Native Americans we hadn't gotten around to genociding yet, the Second Amendment might have been a good idea.

Does it make sense in 2015? Not even a little tiny bit. The thing is, you don't want Joker Holmes or Adam Lanza to have an AR15 any more than I do. But once you say, "You can't have that", it's no longer a "right", it then becomes a privilege.

I choose my rights over your privilege.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Wrong moron....our violent crime rate is going down...as more Americans own and actually carry guns......you are a liar...which is why we do not trust you anti gun morons........nothing you say can be trusted....

not one more gun, bullet or piece of equipment.....those days are over ...we are going to fight you at each step....moron.

Guy, we had 4 people killed and 38 wounded in Chicago over the weekend. This comes after your boy Scalia struck down our common sense gun laws.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Yes, he is intellectually dishonest. The UK doesn't have so many guns, but they have just as many suicides. They just kill themselves other ways

You don't like the stats????? Too ******* bad.......We are a very violent country with a very infantile wish to constantly be at war with one another.

Maybe we can address this infantile behavior without having to disarm law abiding citizens.

Firearms have nothing to do with violent behavior in this country, that behavior is there with or without the firearm. Progressives need to stop making excuses for bad behavior if they are to be taken seriously… LOL

You and I both know this.

What is the ulterior motive besides disarming the populous?

Everyone is pretty much set in their ways... One side or the other will have to force their will on the other.

Or die trying.

 

[kaz]

Yes, he is intellectually dishonest. The UK doesn't have so many guns, but they have just as many suicides. They just kill themselves other ways

You don't like the stats????? Too ******* bad.......We are a very violent country with a very infantile wish to constantly be at war with one another.

Maybe we can address this infantile behavior without having to disarm law abiding citizens.

Firearms have nothing to do with violent behavior in this country, that behavior is there with or without the firearm. Progressives need to stop making excuses for bad behavior if they are to be taken seriously… LOL

You and I both know this.

What is the ulterior motive besides disarming the populous?

Yep, the left work endlessly for the tyranny of the majority, clearly when you do that you don't want an armed minority

 

[Rustic]

So you have no legal precedent to quote that says people do not have a right to own firearms but I have a Federal Appeals court decision that says they do

If I were you I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Supreme Court to shit can the second amendment. But I do encourage you to try

Again, the Second Amendment is an idea whose time has come and gone.

Now, in 1787, before we had professional armies and police forces, when hunting was necessary for survival, when you still had roaming bands of Native Americans we hadn't gotten around to genociding yet, the Second Amendment might have been a good idea.

Does it make sense in 2015? Not even a little tiny bit. The thing is, you don't want Joker Holmes or Adam Lanza to have an AR15 any more than I do. But once you say, "You can't have that", it's no longer a "right", it then becomes a privilege.

I choose my rights over your privilege.

Joe thinks Indian tribes did not wipe other Indian tribes from existence. Lol
Joe must be roped in that politically correct history book with no real facts in it... Indians tribes enslaved and wiped out whole other Indian tribes all the time. Of course some pussyfied politically correct history book would never say such truth… LOL

 

[kwc57]

So tell me Natalie

I always find it funny, when right wing imbeciles "assume" that I'm a woman because of my progressive values...
Not that it matters to idiots, but I'm an older, retired MALE who doesn't need guns to prove my manhood.

I'm well aware that your are biologically male. I refer to you as a female because you're a *****.

 

[Rustic]

So tell me Natalie

I always find it funny, when right wing imbeciles "assume" that I'm a woman because of my progressive values...
Not that it matters to idiots, but I'm an older, retired MALE who doesn't need guns to prove my manhood.

I'm well aware that your are biologically male. I refer to you as a female because you're a *****.

The progressive American male - ***** whipped

 

[kwc57]

You have to ignore the fact that every human lucky enough to escape the liberal's knife started out as an embryo.

is there a Godwin's Law type term for threads that devolve to abortion..?

if not, there ought to be...

also should be a word for the lame posters who inevitably take just about every topic there.

BTW are you actually claiming republicans don't abort pregnancies..?

The OP feigns concern about the number of deaths of children by guns. I'm simply asking if they are equally concerned by the 10 times larger death of children by abortion. I'm looking for consistency and to discover the real agenda behind the concern. I suspect it isn't the death of children that concerns the OP at all, but the fear of boomsticks. The violent death of a child is the violent death of a child, regardless of the means. The OP pisses her pants over child death by guns, but remains silent on abortion. She is agenda driven, not driven by any altruistic concern for children. In short, I gave her a test, she failed and I call bullshit.

 

[nat4900]

Well, we have amply heard from the right wingers and their "love" of guns....a love mostly based on fear of the bad-ass government placing them into "relocation camps"...and a need to show how truly macho they can be on a message board.....

But there is a simple thought to ponder in everyone's privacy of one's own conscience:

Which side of this pro or anti assault weapons' argument would Adam Lanza be supporting???

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well, we have amply heard from the right wingers and their "love" of guns....a love mostly based on fear of the bad-ass government placing them into "relocation camps"...and a need to show how truly macho they can be on a message board.....

But there is a simple thought to ponder in everyone's privacy of one's own conscience:

Which side of this pro or anti assault weapons' argument would Adam Lanza be supporting???

Meaningless point.

Most people who support the second amendment do not have illusions of fighting the government. They just want to protect their right to defend themselves and their families.

Why would any of you have a problem with that?

 

[Deleted member 53821]

I think if we can sue gun manufacturers for deaths their product caused then we can sue Hillary for Benghazi. What do you think.

 

[nat4900]

Meaningless point.

Most people who support the second amendment do not have illusions of fighting the government. They just want to protect their right to defend themselves and their families.

Why would any of you have a problem with that?

Defending yourselves from EXACTLY WHAT?????

A burglar? A bear? A salesman?...............The point here is NOT to take away all your cute little guns....the point is that assault-style-kill-as-many-people-as-possible-in-shortest-time kind of weapons have NO place in a civilized society.

 

[kwc57]

I own an AR-15, 223
I own a Glock 23, .40
I own an S&W carbine .22

Which is an assault weapon

Well according to Natalie, they all make a scary boom and that assaults her sensitive nature......so they all are assault weapons.

 

[nat4900]

we can sue Hillary for Benghazi. What do you think.

Ask a grown up what ******* sense "suing Hillary for Benghazi" would make......Keep your hatred of Hillary to yourself....it has no place on this thread.