New Yorkers... Give up your guns.

[LINY4Runner]

You guys know he's trolling you, right? He can't debate to save his life and has gotten his ass kicked every time he's tried, so instead he gets his rocks off by riling people up and derailing threads. He wants attention, and he wants to get under your skin. If you ignore him, you stop rewarding him, and eventually he'll wander away.

Sounds a lot like Colion Noir's description of insane mass shooters. He offered the same solution too.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/hR3t7j2tUec" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Thai]

You will likely never hear me say this aside from this one post but....


I agree with Thai. :tape:

Actually, many months ago, you also agreed with me...for the record. :laugh:

 

[LINY4Runner]

Actually, many months ago, you also agreed with me...for the record. :laugh:

Rare enough to remember certain instances :wink2:

 

[ndcent]

Is everyone who disagrees with you considered a fringe element / hillbilly / redneck / extremist or just us here on T4R?

Only to the extent that everyone who disagrees with you is some "indoctrinated Obama luver."

 

[LINY4Runner]

Only to the extent that everyone who disagrees with you is some "indoctrinated Obama luver."

Here we go. Gloves just dropped. I'm gonna unsubscribe now.

 

[ndcent]

You guys know he's trolling you, right? He can't debate to save his life and has gotten his ass kicked every time he's tried, so instead he gets his rocks off by riling people up and derailing threads. He wants attention, and he wants to get under your skin. If you ignore him, you stop rewarding him, and eventually he'll wander away.

I can see how weak minds would want to believe that, if only to feel better about themselves.

 

[RunninInGA]

Here we go. Gloves just dropped. I'm gonna unsubscribe now.

Don't do that - that's what he wants.

 

[LINY4Runner]

I can see how weak minds would want to believe that, if only to feel better about themselves.

Dude, look what you've resorted to.

This is the point where you should collect what pride you have left and go...but you're one of those keyboard warriors who just want to start shit.

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser"
-Socrates

 

[ndcent]

What I want is calm rational debate.

What I've gotten is bumper sticker slogans and being called anti-freedom and indoctrinated.

It works both ways, cupcake.

 

[LINY4Runner]

What I want is calm rational debate.

What I've gotten is bumper sticker slogans and being called anti-freedom and indoctrinated.

It works both ways, cupcake.

What you've gotten is common sense and fact. Common sense and fact cannot be debated when feelings and what-if's are your tool.

Cite FACT that an assault weapons ban has or will reduce violent crime.
Cite FACT that a 30-round magazine is more dangerous for the average gun owner to own than a pile of 20, 15, 10-rounders
Cite FACT that guns are used in more deaths than knives or blunt objects that are so "freely available".

And please tell me; if gun-free means safe, why do the police in Australia still carry?

Give me that, and I will give you a debate. Any less and you'll be disregarded in this thread.

 

[ndcent]

What you've gotten is common sense and fact. Common sense and fact cannot be debated when feelings and what-if's are your tool.

Cite FACT that an assault weapons ban has or will reduce violent crime.
Cite FACT that a 30-round magazine is more dangerous for the average gun owner to own than a pile of 20, 15, 10-rounders
Cite FACT that guns are used in more deaths than knives or blunt objects that are so "freely available".

And please tell me; if gun-free means safe, why do the police in Australia still carry?

Give me that, and I will give you a debate. Any less and you'll be disregarded in this thread.

The fact is I'm not advocating for any of that nonsense.

If people would stop putting words in my mouth with their preconceived notions and stereotypes that would be super helpful.

What I have advocated against is the notion that anyone should be allowed to own any firearm and how the commonly held belief here that debate regarding same ought be snuffed out "because freedoms."

Telling how the only posts of mine being quoted are the silly riffing ones.

 

[nevada]

What I have advocated against is the notion that anyone should be allowed to own any firearm

can you go back and quote where someone said they wanted that?

 

[LINY4Runner]

What I have advocated against is the notion that anyone should be allowed to own any firearm and how the commonly held belief here that debate regarding same ought be snuffed out "because freedoms."

Well I don't think any 17-year-old with a rich daddy should be driving a Murcielago either but until he breaks a law with it I have no place sticking my beliefs on him.
The beauty of this country is that you can do whatever you want so long as you don't break laws doing it.

 

[Thai]

What I have advocated against is the notion that anyone should be allowed to own any firearm and how the commonly held belief here that debate regarding same ought be snuffed out "because freedoms."

Telling how the only posts of mine being quoted are the silly riffing ones.

The problem here is that all the liberals think that new laws and regulations will prevent crime. It does NOT. NEVER has. PROVEN. Nada.

What we need is more ENFORCING of CURRENT laws and regs. The problem here is financial. We don't have enough money to go around enforcing current laws and regs. Instead, idiotically, we put more laws and regs that are never enforced and then call it a day. Looks great on paper and in voting booths (as you like so much)...but downright idiotic in reality.

Old post by me:

A decent article from NY Times (shocking!!): Gun Laws and Crime - A Complex Relationship - NYTimes.com

In other words, strict gun laws have not been shown to do what it intends to do.

ABC 20/20 article: Gun Control Isn't Crime Control - ABC News

Note, these two articles are not from NRA or pro-gun sites! They are from traditionally liberal sites!

Long article: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/194051.pdf

But, at least, from reading it, it seems like enforcement of existing regulations is what is needed, rather than more laws/regulations. And yes, criminal background check do work if done right (aka enough staffing, funding, etc.).

Unfortunately, nothing will prevent a guy with psychiatric issues from snapping. Liberals are equally ignorant to think that it is possible via gun control.

 

[LINY4Runner]

The problem is and always has been people.

The parents who are too proud to admit their kid has a few screws loose. The teachers who are too worried about being politically correct to say something. The kids who, because they have no help, have trouble dealing with life. The doctors who feed these kids "samples" to avoid writing prescriptions. The registration of guns and ammo but not the drugs making the people go crazy and use them for evil. The criminals for dealing black market weapons. The nutjobs who kill their own mother for her guns because he was denied one by the NICS check.

Look at the mass shootings, EVERY mass shooting. Same person, different face and name.

 

[zopperman]

The problem here is that all the liberals think that new laws and regulations will prevent crime.
What we need is more ENFORCING of CURRENT laws and regs. The problem here is financial.

One of my profs was a police chief and espoused this idea to no end and I agree 100%.

 

[Thai]

One of my profs was a police chief and espoused this idea to no end and I agree 100%.

Unfortunately, there is no end to the liberal stank. They have to do SOMETHING to make them look good to the uninformed American public, which sadly makes up probably most of America. Lets make new laws and regs yet we're so far in debt. Idiot. But, hey, can you blame them for trying? There are plenty of dumbass Americans out there bending over and letting these idiots walk all over them!

Uninformed America is what led us to this. Uninformed America is what led us to Obamanation and Obamacare.

The sad part is that these uninformed Americans would still vote for Obama and the libtards over and over and over again...even after losing their jobs due to Obamacare! Sad.

 

[dorton]

Your interpretation of centuries old text doesn't supercede mine.

The argument that anyone should be able to own any firearm "because freedom" is as laughable as it is scary.

The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution- Preamble to the Bill of Rights

The 2nd Ammendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

We need to define 2 words from the 2nd Ammendment. One being "regulated", and the other being "Militia".

"Regulated" in the Colonial Period would not be the same as what we think of today. When we think of regulation today, we think of Government intervention. "Regulated" during that period: To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc;To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation;To put in good order.

A well regulated Militia didn't mean it was restrained, it meant it was in good working order, with the equipment needed to provide protection for this nation.

Read the Journals of the Continental Congress 1774-1789 for many referenced of "Regulated".

That gets us on to that oh so nasty and taboo word, "Militia"

According to Title 10 Subtitle A Part I Chapter 13 of US Code

The "Militia" is :

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

That means the vast majority of members on this board are Milita whether they know it or not.

Why shouldn't I as a law abiding citizen be able to purchase and own any firearm my heart desires?

 

[JBecker]

The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution- Preamble to the Bill of Rights

The 2nd Ammendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

We need to define 2 words from the 2nd Ammendment. One being "regulated", and the other being "Militia".

"Regulated" in the Colonial Period would not be the same as what we think of today. When we think of regulation today, we think of Government intervention. "Regulated" during that period: To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc;To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation;To put in good order.

A well regulated Militia didn't mean it was restrained, it meant it was in good working order, with the equipment needed to provide protection for this nation.

Read the Journals of the Continental Congress 1774-1789 for many referenced of "Regulated".

That gets us on to that oh so nasty and taboo word, "Militia"

According to Title 10 Subtitle A Part I Chapter 13 of US Code

The "Militia" is :

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b)The classes of the militia are&#151;
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

That means the vast majority of members on this board are Milita whether they know it or not.

Why shouldn't I as a law abiding citizen be able to purchase and own any firearm my heart desires?

Bravo sir!

 

[LINY4Runner]

The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution- Preamble to the Bill of Rights

The 2nd Ammendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

We need to define 2 words from the 2nd Ammendment. One being "regulated", and the other being "Militia".

"Regulated" in the Colonial Period would not be the same as what we think of today. When we think of regulation today, we think of Government intervention. "Regulated" during that period: To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc;To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation;To put in good order.

A well regulated Militia didn't mean it was restrained, it meant it was in good working order, with the equipment needed to provide protection for this nation.

Read the Journals of the Continental Congress 1774-1789 for many referenced of "Regulated".

That gets us on to that oh so nasty and taboo word, "Militia"

According to Title 10 Subtitle A Part I Chapter 13 of US Code

The "Militia" is :

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

That means the vast majority of members on this board are Milita whether they know it or not.

Why shouldn't I as a law abiding citizen be able to purchase and own any firearm my heart desires?

What he said. :hatsoff: