The AR-15, a great tool to stop a violent mob from burning and looting your home or business...or murdering you and your family. Democrats hate this.

[2aguy]

I never said that. My question was basically does one groups' "morals" override another groups' "morals" Whose "morals" are more valid?

Easy.....the morals that say it is okay to murder innocent people is wrong.....the morals that say murdering innocent people is evil, are more valid....

 

[Vagabond63]

And then Cumbria happened and Plymouth….. Mass public shootings in Britain after the Dumblane ban and confiscation….and the only difference was the killers just didn’t choose schools for their attacks…..your gun control laws didn’t stop them.

Oh, so you want to copare spree killings now? OK we have had one such incident roughly evey decade, since 1997.

According to your now favourite source, Mother Jones, there have been 108 such events in the USA since 1997.

No law or set of laws are 100% effective. The trick is to have a system in place that is as effective as it can be, as opposed to no system at all, or a system so lax it is effectively more honoured in the breach than the observance.

 

[Vagabond63]

Wrong…… paperwork doesn’t stop a killer…

Never said it did.

 

[Vagabond63]

Easy.....the morals that say it is okay to murder innocent people is wrong.....the morals that say murdering innocent people is evil, are more valid....

Who defines who is considered "innocent"?

 

[2aguy]

Who defines who is considered "innocent"?

Easy......people who haven't committed crimes, or murder.....

You socialists do go out of your way to excuse other mass murdering socialists...

Yes.....you must be Right...the victims are the criminals, the criminals are the victims....

 

[Vagabond63]

The same place it says we can deny a criminal freedom of movement....in violation of his Constitutional Rights.......

So the US constitution is not absolute, the right to keep and bear arms can be legally infringed. the 2nd ammendment is clearly a waste of time and now outdated then.

 

[2aguy]

Oh, so you want to copare spree killings now? OK we have had one such incident roughly evey decade, since 1997.

According to your now favourite source, Mother Jones, there have been 108 such events in the USA since 1997.

No law or set of laws are 100% effective. The trick is to have a system in place that is as effective as it can be, as opposed to no system at all, or a system so lax it is effectively more honoured in the breach than the observance.

Yep...you had one such incident every decade or so before you banned guns.....your nuts had access to guns, still do as you say, and yet they didn't commit acts of mass murder......why?

Culture and the long term societal effects of 2 world Wars, and a history of Monarchical social structure.....

After you banned guns......you still have about one mass public shooting every 10 years....

See....science...real science, would point out that when you take out a variable, in this case guns....and the effect doesn't change...that variable isn't the cause .......

 

[Vagabond63]

Easy......people who haven't committed crimes, or murder.....

So murder isn't a crime then?

 

[2aguy]

So the US constitution is not absolute, the right to keep and bear arms can be legally infringed. the 2nd ammendment is clearly a waste of time and now outdated then.

What is it about the Constitution that you guys do not understand......

It gives us a process for dealing with people who break the law...that doesn't mean, you twit....that you get to scrap the whole thing on a whim.....

I know...you can now be arrested for singing "Kung Fu Fighting," in Britain, and you think this is going to be a good path for you guys.....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you? Read the links carefully as they contain the answer you seek.

Your statement is false, as the links you posted contain no thing.
Disagree?
Copy and paste the text to that effect.

Your people are more than able to acquire firearms that are capable of being used for just such a purpose.
Why don't you have as many shootings?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Where does it say in your constitution that a criminal no longer has the right to bear arms?

The constitution allows the state to remove rights and liberties through due process.
The state, through due process, removed the rights of criminals, etc, to own a gun.
To vote, as well.

 

[Vagabond63]

Your statement is false,

Ah, so you've not bothered to read the links. OK, remain in ignorance.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Ah, so you've not bothered to read the links. OK, remain in ignorance.

I did. In full.
Nothing in the links you posted demonstrates why your country has fewer shootings - despite having access to firearms that are capable of being used for just such a purpose.
Disagree?
Copy and paste the text to that effect.

Don't worry - we both know you won't , because we both know you know said text does not exist.
G'head. Prove me correct.

 

[2aguy]

I did. In full.
Nothing in the links you posted explains why your country has fewer shootings - despite having access to firearms that are capable of being used for just such a purpose.
Disagree?
Copy and paste the text to that effect.

Don't worry - we both know you won't , because we both know you know said text does not exist.
G'head. Prove me correct.

Thanks....you make that point really well......

 

[Flash]

The Democrats certainly encouraged the goddamn BLM Negroes to riot, murder, loot and destroy.

Fortunately most the destruction was in the Negro neighborhoods so it was just the dumbasses destroying themselves.

I guarantee you that if they decided to come to my neighborhood with their hate and destruction they would be met with Americans that have the means to stop them.

Democrats don't like that, do they?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I never said that. My question was basically does one groups' "morals" override another groups' "morals" Whose "morals" are more valid?

I believe my first reply was when you have morals it's easy to spot those who dont.
I'll stand by that.
It's pretty obvious when someone is baking and gasing people they dont have morals.
I really dont see the argument here.

 

[Vagabond63]

I did. In full.
Nothing in the links you posted demonstrates why your country has fewer shootings - despite having access to firearms that are capable of being used for just such a purpose.
Disagree?
Copy and paste the text to that effect.

Don't worry - we both know you won't , because we both know you know said text does not exist.
G'head. Prove me correct.

Hmm, perhaps Isaac Asimov was right. OK. I'll give you a clue, "stop looking at the trees".

 

[Vagabond63]

I believe my first reply was when you have morals it's easy to spot those who dont.
I'll stand by that.
It's pretty obvious when someone is baking and gasing people they dont have morals.
I really dont see the argument here.

No, you really don't. It seems your mentality is that of, "I'm right and the rest of the world is wrong." Fair enough.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Hmm, perhaps Isaac Asimov was right. OK. I'll give you a clue, "stop looking at the trees".

And thus, your inability to prove your claim, demonstrated.
Again.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

No, you really don't. It seems your mentality is that of, "I'm right and the rest of the world is wrong." Fair enough.

So you believe it was okay to bake and gas jews.
Seems to me there are no limits according to you.
I bet you would've cheered on the Bataan Death March as well.