You Can't Win When 1/5th of Your Voters Think You Should Drop Out

[Indeependent]

Sure. But first a question. What will you do about it when I provide one? Will you admit Hillary is a lying psychopathic *****?

Sorry, I don't answer questions until I've examined the evidence(which I am pretty sure is unauthentic).

What about what I said is unclear? Hillary admitted she lied about what Comey said. He said she didn't lie to the FBI. She said Comey said he didn't lie to anyone. That was a lie.

I'll be glad to prove it, but I want to know what the point it first. So, what are you offering?

Don't bother, I'm not going to play word games with you.

You're playing the word games. I made a statement, you asked for a link. I said sure, but I want to know what you're offering WHEN I provide one. Now you're running away and hiding like the scared little ***** that you are. Don't pretend you're taking the high road. You're just running away

I'm right here Kaz, I haven't gone anywhere I'm just not interested in playing your word games.

The problem, de fake-o, is that NO ONE is asking regular people walking down the street.
You know why?
Regular people don't give a crap about what the GOP or Media has to say.
And there's A LOT more regular people than GOP and Media folk.

 

[JoeB131]

I find it funny that she has spent so much money and a complete ass like trump is still in it. She is arguably the worst candidate ever put forth by a political party, and the only reason why she isn't sitting in jail is because her husband was POTUS, and of course the willing disbelief of her various supporters. If she were a good candidate she would be wiping the floor with the trumpster.

She isn't. Because she is a corrupt scumbag.

Guy, she is wiping the floor with the Trumpster. Jesus, man, Georgia and Utah are in play.

The Dems haven't won Georgia since 1980... They haven't won Utah since 1964.

the thing is, you are ALWAYS going to have that 40% who will vote for the Republican, and you will ALWAYS have that 40% that will vote for the Democrat.

But the good news is, you'll have four years to perfect your bile against the woman. If you are lucky, maybe even 8.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm all for anything that will work, but I want results, not intentions. Intentions don't change anything.

Okay, guy.

Every other industrialized country limits or bans private gun ownership.

Every other industrialized country has a fraction of our murder and crime rates.

This isn't complicated.

 

[westwall]

I find it funny that she has spent so much money and a complete ass like trump is still in it. She is arguably the worst candidate ever put forth by a political party, and the only reason why she isn't sitting in jail is because her husband was POTUS, and of course the willing disbelief of her various supporters. If she were a good candidate she would be wiping the floor with the trumpster.

She isn't. Because she is a corrupt scumbag.

Guy, she is wiping the floor with the Trumpster. Jesus, man, Georgia and Utah are in play.

The Dems haven't won Georgia since 1980... They haven't won Utah since 1964.

the thing is, you are ALWAYS going to have that 40% who will vote for the Republican, and you will ALWAYS have that 40% that will vote for the Democrat.

But the good news is, you'll have four years to perfect your bile against the woman. If you are lucky, maybe even 8.

No, she isn't. That's the point.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Okay, guy.

Every other industrialized country limits or bans private gun ownership.

Every other industrialized country has a fraction of our murder and crime rates.

This isn't complicated.

Neither is the fact we are an extremely diverse country unlike all those others. You want to blame the problem on the object when the reality is it's the people and not the object.

If we were a single race/ culture country, our gun deaths would be much lower as well even with our guns:

Guns and race: The different worlds of black and white Americans | Brookings Institution

 

[JoeB131]

No, she isn't. That's the point.

A double digit lead isn't mopping the floor with him?

Neither is the fact we are an extremely diverse country unlike all those others. You want to blame the problem on the object when the reality is it's the people and not the object.

Guy, someone should have explained Occam's Razor to you at an early age.

We have m ore gun deaths because we have more guns.

The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Guy, someone should have explained Occam's Razor to you at an early age.

We have m ore gun deaths because we have more guns.

The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

No it isn't because facts don't weigh on your side.

The countries that put gun bans into effect had little trouble before the bans took place. After the bans, there was little improvement if any in the long term.

We've seen the exact same thing here with the Brady Bill. After looking at it the ten or so years it was in place, no evidence to suggest it did anything at all. That's why they never renewed the bill.

Today we have a huge problem with illegal narcotics--probably more so than other countries. Yet we've totally banned recreational narcotics years ago just like what you want to do with guns today.

Laws only work on law abiding people. They don't work on criminals, because that's why they are criminals in the first place: they don't listen to silly laws.

 

[sealybobo]

We're never going to solve/stop all shootings but maybe instead of 50 people maybe the next shooter only kills 25

The seconds it takes you to reload makes all the difference.

And an assault rifle is more accurate from a distance. That would give cops a better chance taking on a mass shooter.

Since you can do just as much damage with a hand gun why do you cry over assault rifles?

As I stated, getting rid of every assault rifle (what ever an assault rifle is) won't stop one mass shooter. I won't save any lives. It won't change anything.

What it will do is take the next step towards disarming the public. First assault rifles, then any semi-automatic rifles, then semi-automatic pistols, then any kind of pistol, then shotguns...........

I'm all for anything that will work, but I want results, not intentions. Intentions don't change anything.

And since all the laws in the world won't stop one criminal from getting a gun (or an assault rifle) then wouldn't the obvious solution to the problem be having an armed citizenry?

Some smart person said we know we can't stop every nut. What we can do is lower the number of murders.

1. Ban assault rifles. If you have one keep it but we no longer make these. It's not a slippery slope. It could be but it's not. I feel your concern but banning granades and dynomite isn't a bad idea, is it? Some guns are too powerful/lethal. What's next death ray guns that can wip thousands out with the push of a button.

2. Background checks.

3 parents put gun locks on their guns

4. No fly no buy

5 a million other common sense things

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Some smart person said we know we can't stop every nut. What we can do is lower the number of murders.

1. Ban assault rifles. If you have one keep it but we no longer make these. It's not a slippery slope. It could be but it's not. I feel your concern but banning granades and dynomite isn't a bad idea, is it? Some guns are too powerful/lethal. What's next death ray guns that can wip thousands out with the push of a button.

2. Background checks.

3 parents put gun locks on their guns

4. No fly no buy

5 a million other common sense things

And none of which will produce any positive results.

You don't need grenades or dynamite for self-defense.
Some guns are too powerful? The AR-15 is no more powerful than many other handguns.
Gun locks have been around for decades, but you can't force people to use them.
We do have background checks to buy weapons in this country.

 

[JoeB131]

No it isn't because facts don't weigh on your side.

The countries that put gun bans into effect had little trouble before the bans took place. After the bans, there was little improvement if any in the long term.

Because there weren't a lot of guns BEFORE the gun bans.. Dumbass...

Again- Occam's Razor. Look it up.

We've seen the exact same thing here with the Brady Bill. After looking at it the ten or so years it was in place, no evidence to suggest it did anything at all. That's why they never renewed the bill.

Because the Brady Bill didn't do anything to reduce the number of guns. Or limit who could have them.

Today we have a huge problem with illegal narcotics--probably more so than other countries. Yet we've totally banned recreational narcotics years ago just like what you want to do with guns today.

Drug use is actually down from where it was in the 1970's... so that would be wrong.

Laws only work on law abiding people. They don't work on criminals, because that's why they are criminals in the first place: they don't listen to silly laws.

Guy, most gun deaths are suicides, accidents and domestic violence. Criminals aren't really the problem here. The rest of us are.

Mateen, Cho, Farook, Hasan, Lanza, Loughner, Mercer, Holmes, Kleibold and Harris- every last one of them was a "law abiding" person up until they day they shot up a bunch of their fellow citizens.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No it isn't because facts don't weigh on your side.

The countries that put gun bans into effect had little trouble before the bans took place. After the bans, there was little improvement if any in the long term.

Because there weren't a lot of guns BEFORE the gun bans.. Dumbass...

Again- Occam's Razor. Look it up.

We've seen the exact same thing here with the Brady Bill. After looking at it the ten or so years it was in place, no evidence to suggest it did anything at all. That's why they never renewed the bill.

Because the Brady Bill didn't do anything to reduce the number of guns. Or limit who could have them.

Today we have a huge problem with illegal narcotics--probably more so than other countries. Yet we've totally banned recreational narcotics years ago just like what you want to do with guns today.

Drug use is actually down from where it was in the 1970's... so that would be wrong.

Laws only work on law abiding people. They don't work on criminals, because that's why they are criminals in the first place: they don't listen to silly laws.

Guy, most gun deaths are suicides, accidents and domestic violence. Criminals aren't really the problem here. The rest of us are.

Mateen, Cho, Farook, Hasan, Lanza, Loughner, Mercer, Holmes, Kleibold and Harris- every last one of them was a "law abiding" person up until they day they shot up a bunch of their fellow citizens.

Because there weren't a lot of guns BEFORE the gun bans.. Dumbass...

Again- Occam's Razor. Look it up.

Oh, so what you're saying is they made a law for something that was never a problem? Yeah, that sounds like the liberal mentality.

Because the Brady Bill didn't do anything to reduce the number of guns. Or limit who could have them.

Then you better have a meeting with your fellow liberal USMB bloggers and tell them that assault weapons bans won't do any good, because they seem to think it would, just like you seem to think if we made more laws against gun ownership, the criminals will just give up crime and get jobs.

Drug use is actually down from where it was in the 1970's... so that would be wrong.

With pot, maybe, but with opioids, just the opposite.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, so what you're saying is they made a law for something that was never a problem? Yeah, that sounds like the liberal mentality.

You mean they made a law for something BEFORE it became a problem... that's actually kind of smart.

Let's take one example. Germany. Now, contrary to what you nuts believe, gun ownership for Germans was pretty widespread in Nazi Germany. AFTER the war, the Allies confiscated most of the privately held guns and hung Germans who kept shooting at them.

But then Germany wrote its own gun laws, and instead of saying, "Hey, let's make gun ownership a right", they made it a privilege. Yes, you can own a gun, but under very strict rules that keeps them out of the hands of nuts.

Germany had all of 250 gun murders compared to our 11,101 in 2011.

 

[JoeB131]

Then you better have a meeting with your fellow liberal USMB bloggers and tell them that assault weapons bans won't do any good, because they seem to think it would, just like you seem to think if we made more laws against gun ownership, the criminals will just give up crime and get jobs.

I would say a REAL gun law would do a lot of good.

The Brady Bill wasn't that law. But it made you guys batshit crazy to just see this decent man and his wife stare you down...

Again- criminals aren't the problem... the rest of you are. LIke the guy I used to work with who chased his wife down the street back in May shooting at her.

 

[JoeB131]

With pot, maybe, but with opioids, just the opposite.

Well, yeah, we do have a problem with opioids, in that doctors give them out like candy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Then you better have a meeting with your fellow liberal USMB bloggers and tell them that assault weapons bans won't do any good, because they seem to think it would, just like you seem to think if we made more laws against gun ownership, the criminals will just give up crime and get jobs.

I would say a REAL gun law would do a lot of good.

The Brady Bill wasn't that law. But it made you guys batshit crazy to just see this decent man and his wife stare you down...

Again- criminals aren't the problem... the rest of you are. LIke the guy I used to work with who chased his wife down the street back in May shooting at her.

Oh, but he wasn't a criminal, was he?

And I don't know where your mentality is living in Chicago. Didn't they just have 9 deadly shootings in one weekend alone recently? That's not to mention the dozens of non-lethal shootings. But none of those were criminals, were they?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well, yeah, we do have a problem with opioids, in that doctors give them out like candy.

It has nothing to do with doctors. Opioids are the drug of choice like pot was in the 70's. The difference is pot didn't kill people by the thousands every month. If anything, doctors and facilities are under government pressure to reduce prescribing pain killers to patients. I know several people who have suffered dearly because of it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You mean they made a law for something BEFORE it became a problem... that's actually kind of smart.

Let's take one example. Germany. Now, contrary to what you nuts believe, gun ownership for Germans was pretty widespread in Nazi Germany. AFTER the war, the Allies confiscated most of the privately held guns and hung Germans who kept shooting at them.

But then Germany wrote its own gun laws, and instead of saying, "Hey, let's make gun ownership a right", they made it a privilege. Yes, you can own a gun, but under very strict rules that keeps them out of the hands of nuts.

Germany had all of 250 gun murders compared to our 11,101 in 2011.

And again, Germany is nearly a one culture--one race society.

You can arm every single German citizen, and they will continue to have 250 gun murders a year; maybe less since the potential victims would be armed. And you can take every law Germany ever made on guns and have those laws in the US instead, and it won't change our murder rate one bit.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, but he wasn't a criminal, was he?

And I don't know where your mentality is living in Chicago. Didn't they just have 9 deadly shootings in one weekend alone recently? That's not to mention the dozens of non-lethal shootings. But none of those were criminals, were they?

i wouldn't know. I'm sure a lot of those were domestic arguments...

 

[JoeB131]

And again, Germany is nearly a one culture--one race society.

You can arm every single German citizen, and they will continue to have 250 gun murders a year; maybe less since the potential victims would be armed. And you can take every law Germany ever made on guns and have those laws in the US instead, and it won't change our murder rate one bit.

Look, everyone, Raycist from Cleveland is trying to blame minorities for the carnage inflicted by the gun industry.

 

[JoeB131]

It has nothing to do with doctors. Opioids are the drug of choice like pot was in the 70's. The difference is pot didn't kill people by the thousands every month. If anything, doctors and facilities are under government pressure to reduce prescribing pain killers to patients. I know several people who have suffered dearly because of it.

Well, yeah, because we have 2% of the population addicted to painkillers. all wonderfully legal, until they can't get scripts anymore.