We have a plan to end gun violence.

[braindrain]

Anything but random

How so?

Yes but you interpret them the way you would like them to be.

Over and over you make claims. Fail to back them up and have them called out for the lies they are. And yet you then pretend like you are trying to have a honest discussion.
Do you think you really are not that obvious.

 

[brianpatrick]

Over and over you make claims. Fail to back them up and have them called out for the lies they are. And yet you then pretend like you are trying to have a honest discussion.
Do you think you really are not that obvious.

Yeah, I think you don’t understand at all what I’m doing, even after I spelled it out for you all.
I’m not here to prove anything. The Heller 2008 decision was where the modern gun problem started.

 

[braindrain]

Yeah, I think you don’t understand at all what I’m doing, even after I spelled it out for you all.
I’m not here to prove anything. The Heller 2008 decision was where the modern gun problem started.

I doing honestly care what you think you are doing. I will continue to laugh at you and call out your lies.

Back that claim up. You have been asked repeatedly and can’t seem to do so. What do you think that tells everyone about your argument.

 

[RF667799]

Over and over you make claims. Fail to back them up and have them called out for the lies they are. And yet you then pretend like you are trying to have a honest discussion.
Do you think you really are not that obvious.

It seems like it's some sort of religion or something. You have to believe in the premise- with nothing for support- before the story makes much sense.

 

[brianpatrick]

I doing honestly care what you think you are doing. I will continue to laugh at you and call out your lies.

Back that claim up. You have been asked repeatedly and can’t seem to do so. What do you think that tells everyone about your argument.

It keeps Heller 2008 on their lips and minds so that when it comes up later they remember what it is.

 

[RF667799]

It keeps Heller 2008 on their lips and minds so that when it comes up later they remember what it is.

"What it is" being the unsupported story you tell.

 

[medi]

What?
Why?
I stated what must be done to end gun violence- as the state commits violence with guns, for gun violence to end, the state mst be disarmed.
There doesn't need to be a precedent for this.

For you to ask "what" and "why" either indicates you are simply an ignorant follower of some person's/group's thought process on this issue; or you really do not care what ramifications may come about IF the policy you are advocating were to actually succeed in being implemented by the people of your nation.

Either of those two possibilities I outline above puts you in a weak position. I mean, "weak" in the sense that what you are advocating can very easily be shown to be _ _ _ well, let us think of a polite style - - - crap.

You get your act together, mister, and get back to me when you have something that can hold water. The blueprint you have posted in this thread of the dam you are wanting to build doesn't pass inspection!

Sorry, one more thing; go back to school. There IS a precedent for this!! What in the hell do you think happened to the Native American "NATIONS" that were completely disarmed by certain other land greedy humans!!!

 

[RF667799]

For you to ask "what" and "why" either indicates you are simply an ignorant follower of some person's/group's thought process on this issue; or you really do not care what ramifications may come about IF the policy you are advocating were to actually succeed in being implemented by the people of your nation.

Either of those two possibilities I outline above puts you in a weak position. I mean, "weak" in the sense that what you are advocating can very easily be shown to be _ _ _ well, let us think of a polite style - - - crap.

You get your act together, mister, and get back to me when you have something that can hold water. The blueprint you have posted in this thread of the dam you are wanting to build doesn't pass inspection!

Sorry, one more thing; go back to school. There IS a precedent for this!! What in the hell do you think happened to the Native American "NATIONS" that were completely disarmed by certain other land greedy humans!!!

He isn't advocating that as policy.

 

[lwf]

That would depend on how "misuse" is defined. Intoxication in public is far less problematic than discharging a firearm in public.

Presumably you mean from chronic illness. Is your next false equivalence going to be to complain about heart disease or diabetes or obesity?

How many alcohol deaths are inflicted upon other people?

Chronic alcoholism is a personal health problem resembling an addiction.
Firearm death and injury is traumatic, sudden, acute and situational which makes it more preventable.

I would argue that they are both equally preventable using the same strategy. The one you are suggesting.

 

[lwf]

One can enjoy shooting targets with a weapon stored at a shooting range just the same. I’m not criticizing, but you are not getting to the heart of my question. There are many answers to questions surrounding Heller, but mine is why was it so readily accepted by so many (guns at home for “personal protection”) and virulently defended?

And again, it’s not a practical question. I’m not talking about practicality, or laws, or rights, or equivalencies. Have you ever stepped out of your defense and honestly asked why?

One can enjoy alcohol at the bar just the same as well. Should we outlaw the private ownership of alcohol?

I don't know why so many people feel the need to defend their homes with firearms. Certainly, the answer to that question varies by the person. There are some areas of the US where there is a reasonable argument that they are necessary. There are also many more areas where it is unequivocally unnecessary.

Some people enjoy firearms in much the same way that others might enjoy cars. Some own them for recreation, or hunting. Some own them exclusively in order to exercise their second amendment rights. Some are afraid of being the victim of a home invasion, and in some areas that is an entirely rational fear, and in others it is an irrational fear. Some own them for personal protection because they might work or travel in sketchy areas.

The reason why people want to own firearms is irrelevant. The fact that they want to own them is all that matters. The same goes for alcohol.

 

[lwf]

[^ above emphasis added by bubba]

the fear is not a fear OF firearms
it is a fear of the persons bearing firearms
fear that said person may not be mindful of the carnage that could be inflicted by the weapon
or fear that the person bears them to inflict carnage
unless the person is close to the party bearing a firearm, they do not know the likelihood of the bearer to misuse the weapon
fear is a natural human instinct when someone recognizes a potential threat
a perceived threat that the bearer of the firearm inflicts upon others

Fair enough. But we don't get to take freedoms away from our neighbors just because we think they might victimize us.

 

[Mungo Jerry]

For you to ask "what" and "why" either indicates you are simply an ignorant follower of some person's/group's thought process on this issue; or you really do not care what ramifications may come about IF the policy you are advocating were to actually succeed in being implemented by the people of your nation

You need to pay better attention.

 

[Spock]

I would argue that they are both equally preventable using the same strategy. The one you are suggesting.

No. In this case, different diseases mechanisms require different strategies. Firearm violence is not going to be changed by medical measures or counseling.
Public health measures are complicated.

 

[RF667799]

No. In this case, different diseases mechanisms require different strategies. Firearm violence is not going to be changed by medical measures or counseling.
Public health measures are complicated.

Someone committing "firearm violence" can be prevented from further outbreaks by enclosure in a 5x8 cell for the rest of their natural life.

 

[rahl]

Anything but random

Totally random

How so?

What you posted was not true.

Yes but you interpret them the way you would like them to be.

No, I point out exactly what they said, and how many firearms have been sold. There are records of both lol

 

[rahl]

Yeah, I think you don’t understand at all what I’m doing, even after I spelled it out for you all.
I’m not here to prove anything. The Heller 2008 decision was where the modern gun problem started.

And you’ve been shown that this statement you keep making is a lie.

 

[brianpatrick]

And you’ve been shown that this statement you keep making is a lie.

Well, I’ve been told by you and a few of the other gunners, but that doesn’t mean it’s true in any way. What else would pro-gun advocates say?

I will point out that lying about the intent of and obvious harm caused by the Heller 2008 decision is self evident to most people, and I can see why you guys don’t like me saying so.

 

[brianpatrick]

Totally random

What you posted was not true.

No, I point out exactly what they said, and how many firearms have been sold. There are records of both lol

You didn’t actually, and you won’t because the sale of firearms has skyrocketed since the Heller 2008 decision which was as intended.

 

[RF667799]

You didn’t actually, and you won’t because the sale of firearms has skyrocketed since the Heller 2008 decision which was as intended.

It might be like how voting numbers went up in the south when poll taxes and such were eliminated. Many people look favorably upon civil rights being extended to more people. Some obviously don't.

 

[rahl]

Well, I’ve been told by you and a few of the other gunners, but that doesn’t mean it’s true in any way.

But this is also a lie. You’ve been given precious rulings showing your position has no basis in reality.

What else would pro-gun advocates say?

No idea. I don’t speak for everyone. I’m simply refuting your claims and pointing out that you are lying.

I will point out that lying about the intent of and obvious harm caused by the Heller 2008 decision is self evident to most people, and I can see why you guys don’t like me saying so.

You have been shown to be lying about heller. I don’t understand why you think this helps you lol

 

[rahl]

You didn’t actually, and you won’t because the sale of firearms has skyrocketed since the Heller 2008 decision which was as intended.

The sale of firearms has increased exponentially year over year, every year for DECADES. Prior to heller.

So, why do you think posting demonstrated lies is helping you?

 

[brianpatrick]

The sale of firearms has increased exponentially year over year, every year for DECADES. Prior to heller.

So, why do you think posting demonstrated lies is helping you?

I told you that you wouldn’t be able to post anything because I was right. So much for the “you’re lying” argument. Got any others?

 

[lwf]

No. In this case, different diseases mechanisms require different strategies. Firearm violence is not going to be changed by medical measures or counseling.
Public health measures are complicated.

But you didn't suggest preventing firearm violence through medical measures or counseling. You suggested preventing it by outlawing firearms, or at least making it much more difficult to own a firearm. The same strategy could be applied to alcohol with the same results.

 

[Spock]

But you didn't suggest preventing firearm violence through medical measures or counseling. You suggested preventing it by outlawing firearms, or at least making it much more difficult to own a firearm. The same strategy could be applied to alcohol with the same results.

Nope. Alcohol is not equivalent to firearms, in spite of your insistence.

 

[lwf]

Nope. Alcohol is not equivalent to firearms, in spite of your insistence.

I agree alcohol is not equivalent to firearms. It is, however, a recreational activity that carries a cost to society in blood. Do you agree with that statement, at least?