“What Percentage Of Murders Are Committed With An AR-15?”

[Rustic]

People always say that about socialism, funny thing is “on paper” is always different than reality. Socialism has been tried countless times, in countless forms the result has and always will be failure... it is absolutely insane to think “this time” it will work for the good of anyone.
You can go try your little socialist utopia, leave the rest of us out of it...

get your whole and entire understanding of socialism from a dictionary, do you?

we have a mixed market economy. the mixture is, part socialism and part capitalism.

the left is merely learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its capital worth in modern times.

The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism...

what makes you say that?

Any type of collective always has evil intentions

and individuals don't?

Absolute power absolutely corrupts... a lot more checks and balances with individuals.

 

[danielpalos]

get your whole and entire understanding of socialism from a dictionary, do you?

we have a mixed market economy. the mixture is, part socialism and part capitalism.

the left is merely learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its capital worth in modern times.

The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism...

what makes you say that?

Any type of collective always has evil intentions

and individuals don't?

Absolute power absolutely corrupts... a lot more checks and balances with individuals.

there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

and Government requires socialism.

why can't legislators, as individuals, come up with more optimal solutions?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Argument from Ignorance

Description: The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

and Government requires socialism.

Government demands it or having a government makes socialism a necessity? Clarify that point for me.

We have a government, but the means of production is still in the hands of the people.

why can't legislators, as individuals, come up with more optimal solutions?

Because they cannot be trusted. EVER!!! They suck. It is the least effective or efficient means of doing practically ANYTHING.

 

[jbander]

get your whole and entire understanding of socialism from a dictionary, do you?

we have a mixed market economy. the mixture is, part socialism and part capitalism.

the left is merely learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its capital worth in modern times.

The only thing worse than nationalism is globalism...

what makes you say that?

Any type of collective always has evil intentions

and individuals don't?

Absolute power absolutely corrupts... a lot more checks and balances with individuals.

I guess it's time to prove that these Socialism wackos have no clue - Simple proof , This is a fair challenge , go to any encyclopedia , get the main tenets of socialism , come back with those main tenet's, tell us how we have socialism in this country, you clowns don't get to define it, it has been defined many years ago. Bring your Encyclopedia source, never know when Fox crap news comes up with it's a own Encyclopedia. If you want to bullshit your way around this by doing it your way ,don't answer , this is a fair challenge. Stick to the simple rules.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The very definition of government is lousy management

Capitalism cannot do any better since social costs are an externality. That is why we achieve an efficiency gain by having Government. Along with indoor plumbing.

There is no instance where the government is a better manager or resources or a better steward of money than is the private sector

right wing propaganda?

anything the private sector can do, the public sector can do, on a not-for-profit basis.

And at a higher cost.

Not making a profit in no way equals performing the same functions for less money

why not? Labor costs may be higher; but, any public sector has recourse to forms of State Capitalism.

Why not?

and there is very little recourse

Look up the Big Dig and notice that it was 700% over budget.

Only government contracts go that far over budget

 

[Skull Pilot]

Socialism promotes laziness

lousy management does that.

socialism should be about, doing what you love, and not needing to get paid for it.

we have a long way to go.

The very definition of government is lousy management

Capitalism cannot do any better since social costs are an externality. That is why we achieve an efficiency gain by having Government. Along with indoor plumbing.

There is no instance where the government is a better manager or resources or a better steward of money than is the private sector

The hell there isn't, for one simple reason, capitalism has no conscience, government is forced to. One of them is profit driven, where lowest production cost is king. In fact without regulations corporations would eat our children for a profit.

Then post some.

And this has nothing to do with regulations it has to do with whether or not the government can do something at a lower cost and as well as the private sector

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The correct question to ask is what percentage of mass-shootings is done with an assault weapon.

Zero

The term "Assault weapon" is a media invention.

Did you know that most mass shootings were domestic or family violence? Analysis of Mass Shootings

Only 27% of mass shooters used an AR-15. Most used handguns. Reality Check: Most Mass Shooters Use Handguns, Not AR-15s

how many victims per incident per type of weapon?

And what do his links have to do with much of anything at all?

When it mudwhistle 's kid, wife, mother, sister, will the type of weapon or the number of times its been used be the first question he asks?

Next, one of the nutters will say "but swimming pools and cars".

No they would not. Because we know that, absent one weapon a depraved killer or rapist will simply choose another. It is, after all, what depraved killers and rapists do.

I can't speak for mudwhislte, but I know, if my kid, wife, mother, sister were killed in a mass shooting, my first question would be, what antidepressant was the shooter on when he did this.

Even many on the left know it's not the guns causing these shootings, it's the drug.



Watch it and learn. I know you won't, because you don't want to know the truth.

Lets flip your question and see if you have guts enough to answer it:

Your daughter, home with your granddaughter calls you and tells you she repelled a house invasion by a known rapist.

Would you care if she used an AR-15, or for that matter, any weapon, legal or not, to save her and/or your granddaughter?

I look forward to your answer, although I expect you don't have nerve enough to.

And yet when a bill is presented and passed by the house to the Senate that gives law enforcement the ability to temporarily confiscate weapons of people that are obviously violent or mentally ill, the Colorado Republican Senate doesn't even let it get out of the committee before it's defeated on a 5 to 2 strictly party vote. What the law was supposed to do is allow Law Enforcement the ability to seize the weapons of a clearly violent or mentally ill person and immediately quickly get it in front of a Judge who could make it longer term, permanent or override the decision. Your wonderful bunch saying that we should work to get the guns out of the mentally ill's hands is just crap. Guess your sponsor, the NRA, sees it as a way to make more sales. Can't wait until they get an override on all age limits and go for 6 year olds.

Anti-gun nutters like yourself only want your ideas implemented, that is a no-go for the rest of us...

Y hve it backward, cupcake. According to you I am a gun grabber. According to me you are a gun nutter. Keep the narritive straight.

 

[Pop23]

how many victims per incident per type of weapon?

And what do his links have to do with much of anything at all?

When it mudwhistle 's kid, wife, mother, sister, will the type of weapon or the number of times its been used be the first question he asks?

Next, one of the nutters will say "but swimming pools and cars".

No they would not. Because we know that, absent one weapon a depraved killer or rapist will simply choose another. It is, after all, what depraved killers and rapists do.

I can't speak for mudwhislte, but I know, if my kid, wife, mother, sister were killed in a mass shooting, my first question would be, what antidepressant was the shooter on when he did this.

Even many on the left know it's not the guns causing these shootings, it's the drug.



Watch it and learn. I know you won't, because you don't want to know the truth.

Lets flip your question and see if you have guts enough to answer it:

Your daughter, home with your granddaughter calls you and tells you she repelled a house invasion by a known rapist.

Would you care if she used an AR-15, or for that matter, any weapon, legal or not, to save her and/or your granddaughter?

I look forward to your answer, although I expect you don't have nerve enough to.

And yet when a bill is presented and passed by the house to the Senate that gives law enforcement the ability to temporarily confiscate weapons of people that are obviously violent or mentally ill, the Colorado Republican Senate doesn't even let it get out of the committee before it's defeated on a 5 to 2 strictly party vote. What the law was supposed to do is allow Law Enforcement the ability to seize the weapons of a clearly violent or mentally ill person and immediately quickly get it in front of a Judge who could make it longer term, permanent or override the decision. Your wonderful bunch saying that we should work to get the guns out of the mentally ill's hands is just crap. Guess your sponsor, the NRA, sees it as a way to make more sales. Can't wait until they get an override on all age limits and go for 6 year olds.

Anti-gun nutters like yourself only want your ideas implemented, that is a no-go for the rest of us...

Y hve it backward, cupcake. According to you I am a gun grabber. According to me you are a gun nutter. Keep the narritive straight.

Doesn’t really matter what you call yourself, if what you propose doesn’t change anything, then you are simply irrational.

And what you’ve proposed is based completely on speculation which has been proven ineffective, making you simply naive.

 

[Unkotare]

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Bullshit ^^^. The first clause ("A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder") is correct. The rest (a death is a death no matter what tool) is absurd.

Death by a heart attack can be (for example) a genetic deficiency, the use of Tobacco, fast food, drug abuse, etc. Not only is your post absurd and ridiculous, it is also a logical fallacy.

Context is lost on the slow of brain.

Note "murder" is used in the example so the context is death by murder, and it is the death that is relevant, not the tool used to accomplish it.

Some folks just need everything spelled out for em I guess.

It appears you are the one, "slow of brain" since my comment was too abstract for you to comprehend. Tobacco kills, fast food kills, drug abuse kills and guns kill. Of course the first three can be used in moderation and not be the cause of death, as can a gun when the victim is lucky and no artery is hit or organs destroyed by bone splinters, i.e. secondary projectiles, bacterial infections or TBI.

You got a whole lot of Tobacco breaking down your door trying to jam it down your throat? Do ya?

One example is murder, the other is lifestyle.

So spin all you want, but if there were drugs on the market that forced you to shove Big Mac's down kids throats until they burst, you'd say, GET THOSE OFF THE DAMN MARKET.

Those drugs do exist THAT CAUSE MURDER CRAZED PSYCHOPATHS, But that's OK, blame the murder weapon, not the DOCTOR PROSCRIBING THE DRUG!

Once again, a message from the champion of the left:



Guess you kinda like dead kids?

As I posted, my comment was abstract, way beyond the comprehension of a concrete thinker.

It would be funny if you believed that but you don’t.

 

[danielpalos]

there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Argument from Ignorance

Description: The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

and Government requires socialism.

Government demands it or having a government makes socialism a necessity? Clarify that point for me.

We have a government, but the means of production is still in the hands of the people.

why can't legislators, as individuals, come up with more optimal solutions?

Because they cannot be trusted. EVER!!! They suck. It is the least effective or efficient means of doing practically ANYTHING.

We already have Constitutions. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Government is Socialism. Socialism usually is, Government. We have a mixed-market economy not true Capitalism

.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism cannot do any better since social costs are an externality. That is why we achieve an efficiency gain by having Government. Along with indoor plumbing.

There is no instance where the government is a better manager or resources or a better steward of money than is the private sector

right wing propaganda?

anything the private sector can do, the public sector can do, on a not-for-profit basis.

And at a higher cost.

Not making a profit in no way equals performing the same functions for less money

why not? Labor costs may be higher; but, any public sector has recourse to forms of State Capitalism.

Why not?

and there is very little recourse

Look up the Big Dig and notice that it was 700% over budget.

Only government contracts go that far over budget

Lousy management. Hoover Dam was ahead of schedule and under budget.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bullshit ^^^. The first clause ("A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder") is correct. The rest (a death is a death no matter what tool) is absurd.

Death by a heart attack can be (for example) a genetic deficiency, the use of Tobacco, fast food, drug abuse, etc. Not only is your post absurd and ridiculous, it is also a logical fallacy.

Context is lost on the slow of brain.

Note "murder" is used in the example so the context is death by murder, and it is the death that is relevant, not the tool used to accomplish it.

Some folks just need everything spelled out for em I guess.

It appears you are the one, "slow of brain" since my comment was too abstract for you to comprehend. Tobacco kills, fast food kills, drug abuse kills and guns kill. Of course the first three can be used in moderation and not be the cause of death, as can a gun when the victim is lucky and no artery is hit or organs destroyed by bone splinters, i.e. secondary projectiles, bacterial infections or TBI.

You got a whole lot of Tobacco breaking down your door trying to jam it down your throat? Do ya?

One example is murder, the other is lifestyle.

So spin all you want, but if there were drugs on the market that forced you to shove Big Mac's down kids throats until they burst, you'd say, GET THOSE OFF THE DAMN MARKET.

Those drugs do exist THAT CAUSE MURDER CRAZED PSYCHOPATHS, But that's OK, blame the murder weapon, not the DOCTOR PROSCRIBING THE DRUG!

Once again, a message from the champion of the left:



Guess you kinda like dead kids?

As I posted, my comment was abstract, way beyond the comprehension of a concrete thinker.

It would be funny if you believed that but you don’t.

Idiot-gram, Claim of Telepathy, form.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

.
.
Cupcake
.
.
.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

.
.
CupcakeCupcakeCupcake




Cup fuckin CAKE


Cupcake
.
.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I find it hard to take a near-septuagenarian communist buttfucker seriously when he calls people “cupcake” on a way-too-frequent basis.

Cupcake

 

[Pop23]

Context is lost on the slow of brain.

Note "murder" is used in the example so the context is death by murder, and it is the death that is relevant, not the tool used to accomplish it.

Some folks just need everything spelled out for em I guess.

It appears you are the one, "slow of brain" since my comment was too abstract for you to comprehend. Tobacco kills, fast food kills, drug abuse kills and guns kill. Of course the first three can be used in moderation and not be the cause of death, as can a gun when the victim is lucky and no artery is hit or organs destroyed by bone splinters, i.e. secondary projectiles, bacterial infections or TBI.

You got a whole lot of Tobacco breaking down your door trying to jam it down your throat? Do ya?

One example is murder, the other is lifestyle.

So spin all you want, but if there were drugs on the market that forced you to shove Big Mac's down kids throats until they burst, you'd say, GET THOSE OFF THE DAMN MARKET.

Those drugs do exist THAT CAUSE MURDER CRAZED PSYCHOPATHS, But that's OK, blame the murder weapon, not the DOCTOR PROSCRIBING THE DRUG!

Once again, a message from the champion of the left:



Guess you kinda like dead kids?

As I posted, my comment was abstract, way beyond the comprehension of a concrete thinker.

It would be funny if you believed that but you don’t.

Idiot-gram, Claim of Telepathy, form.

Doesn’t take telepathy. It’s proven.

 

[Pop23]

I find it hard to take a near-septuagenarian communist buttfucker seriously when he calls people “cupcake” on a way-too-frequent basis.

Cupcake

Daryl = Creampuff cupcake with snowflake sprinkles

 

[jbander]

there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Argument from Ignorance

Description: The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

and Government requires socialism.

Government demands it or having a government makes socialism a necessity? Clarify that point for me.

We have a government, but the means of production is still in the hands of the people.

why can't legislators, as individuals, come up with more optimal solutions?

Because they cannot be trusted. EVER!!! They suck. It is the least effective or efficient means of doing practically ANYTHING.

We already have Constitutions. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Government is Socialism. Socialism usually is, Government. We have a mixed-market economy not true Capitalism

.

there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Argument from Ignorance

Description: The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

and Government requires socialism.

Government demands it or having a government makes socialism a necessity? Clarify that point for me.

We have a government, but the means of production is still in the hands of the people.

why can't legislators, as individuals, come up with more optimal solutions?

Because they cannot be trusted. EVER!!! They suck. It is the least effective or efficient means of doing practically ANYTHING.

We already have Constitutions. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Government is Socialism. Socialism usually is, Government. We have a mixed-market economy not true Capitalism

.

Government is socialism, That's funny.

 

[jbander]

There is no instance where the government is a better manager or resources or a better steward of money than is the private sector

right wing propaganda?

anything the private sector can do, the public sector can do, on a not-for-profit basis.

And at a higher cost.

Not making a profit in no way equals performing the same functions for less money

why not? Labor costs may be higher; but, any public sector has recourse to forms of State Capitalism.

Why not?

and there is very little recourse

Look up the Big Dig and notice that it was 700% over budget.

Only government contracts go that far over budget

Lousy management. Hoover Dam was ahead of schedule and under budget.

I always get a hoot of these fringe characters, with their attacking everyone because they are socialist and suggest that The private sector would have a chance against Government when it comes to running 3/4 of what the government runs. And the enemy of this country is regulations, That's just funny. What would be the new life expectancy of workers or the Military be, if it was run with a profit motive and no regulations, These people are clowns. Without regulation the American corporation would eat are children for a profit . How do I know because that is exactly what they did before regulations

 

[Skull Pilot]

There is no instance where the government is a better manager or resources or a better steward of money than is the private sector

right wing propaganda?

anything the private sector can do, the public sector can do, on a not-for-profit basis.

And at a higher cost.

Not making a profit in no way equals performing the same functions for less money

why not? Labor costs may be higher; but, any public sector has recourse to forms of State Capitalism.

Why not?

and there is very little recourse

Look up the Big Dig and notice that it was 700% over budget.

Only government contracts go that far over budget

Lousy management. Hoover Dam was ahead of schedule and under budget.

Wow you had to go back how many years for that one?