Live by the gun, die by the gun!!

[Rolling squid]

Hmm.

So would permitting convicted criminals to carry guns in public be considered an "obvious threat"? Since overwhelming evidence has shown that the vast majority of violent crime is, in fact, committed by criminals.



... Well, you know what I mean.

I have no idea. Maybe after some sort of probationary period?

[Skeptikosia]

Hmm.

So would permitting convicted criminals to carry guns in public be considered an "obvious threat"? Since overwhelming evidence has shown that the vast majority of violent crime is, in fact, committed by criminals.

... Well, you know what I mean.

I have no idea. Maybe after some sort of probationary period?

It should depend on the nature of the crime.

[Skeptikosia]

...

Where'd you go?

I'm about. Just taking some time to think up a response.

Are yah done yet?

How about now?

What about now?

Now?

[Bitchkitten]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Hang in there....they are a tough lot!!

Yup, but you invaded them and burnt their capital twice.
I believe that gun ownership is not inherently a terrible idea. However, given that a lot of guns bought legally end up in the hands of criminals, strict limitations on gun ownership is necessary. In England, to own a gun you have to get your house inspected by police to ensure you can keep it securely. Does America have those laws?

Don't be silly. In America we prefer that crack addicts and unmedicated schizophrenics have free access to firearms up to and including stinger missiles.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

[Skeptikosia]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

Then clearly law enforcement shouldn't have guns...

[Gun Manufacturers]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

Then clearly law enforcement shouldn't have guns...

That would put a lot of firearms into the used firearms market, depressing the value. The lower price would be great, except right now, I still wouldn't be able to afford one.

[Skeptikosia]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

Then clearly law enforcement shouldn't have guns...

That would put a lot of firearms into the used firearms market, depressing the value. The lower price would be great, except right now, I still wouldn't be able to afford one.

You and me both.

Luckily I'm set for the short term.

[Erich Dahmer]

I believe that there should be required permits to carry weapons in all states...I am pro gun ownership; yet, in all the events that have happened over the past few decades and all the deaths that have resulted from issues such as domestic violence, school shootings, and domestic and foreign terrorism I wouldn't want the government blindly letting people who frankly would attract more danger by having a gun own firearms. Whilst the people who actually have need to carry fire-arms are refused for some issue because of state law.

Permits did not stop Columbine or any other school shooting and the worst school massacre in American history wasn't carried out by a kid and the weapon of choice was explosives not guns. 9/11 was done with box cutters not balisongs or switchblades.

Attempts to control what property we can and can't own are really just attempts to control our behavior and influence our thinking with strawmen to rationalize the needlessly restrictive laws and their violent enforcement. It doesn't matter if that property is guns or drugs or porn.

[Dagonshire]

if she did shoot him, what are the chances the marital problems was cheating?

[Skeptikosia]

I believe that there should be required permits to carry weapons in all states...I am pro gun ownership; yet, in all the events that have happened over the past few decades and all the deaths that have resulted from issues such as domestic violence, school shootings, and domestic and foreign terrorism I wouldn't want the government blindly letting people who frankly would attract more danger by having a gun own firearms. Whilst the people who actually have need to carry fire-arms are refused for some issue because of state law.

Permits did not stop Columbine or any other school shooting and the worst school massacre in American history wasn't carried out by a kid and the weapon of choice was explosives not guns. 9/11 was done with box cutters not balisongs or switchblades.

Attempts to control what property we can and can't own are really just attempts to control our behavior and influence our thinking with strawmen to rationalize the needlessly restrictive laws and their violent enforcement. It doesn't matter if that property is guns or drugs or porn.

Look at Chicago and DC.

Giant nanny government with de facto gun bans and some of the highest gun crime rates in the country.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

Then clearly law enforcement shouldn't have guns...

That would put a lot of firearms into the used firearms market, depressing the value. The lower price would be great, except right now, I still wouldn't be able to afford one.

You and me both.

Luckily I'm set for the short term.

I'm not. The local sportsman's club won't let me compete in their weekly pistol competition (bowling pin shoot) with my AR15.

[Keylarguay]

American government is built on the radical idea that individuals are the real power in any government. Previously, it was the nobility, or the monarchy, or the pope, or whoever that held all the authority and doled it out as he saw fit. (Never she. If you had a Queen without a King she was likely a witch. I'm looking at you, Elizabeth.)

The American system is based on the (true) principle of allowing people to govern themselves, recognizing that they are better at it than anybody else.

However, it also recognizes that people will fail to govern themselves, which is why we have a criminal system.

It would be immorally negligent to allow a convicted violent criminal easy access to weapons. However, the government has no way of doing so without implementing the death penalty for any and all first-offense violent crimes.

People can hurt other people. That's part of humanity. If you try and legislate it out of existence, the legal system will collapse upon itself.

Should we restrict certain classes of weapons? Heck yeah. Is it silly to try and restrict anything which could be used as a weapon? You bet. The real question, then, is where to draw the line. I don't want my neighbors to have access to tactical nukes. I don't want to be able to go down to the dealership and buy a tank for my regular vehicle. I do want to be able to own as many small arms as I desire and can afford, and I want my neighbors--even the creepy white trash kind--to have that same right.

When all else fails, rely on Heinlein. If it's really easy to be killed, then people get a lot more polite. (Moon is a Harsh Mistress.)

[Skeptikosia]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

Then clearly law enforcement shouldn't have guns...

That would put a lot of firearms into the used firearms market, depressing the value. The lower price would be great, except right now, I still wouldn't be able to afford one.

You and me both.

Luckily I'm set for the short term.

I'm not. The local sportsman's club won't let me compete in their weekly pistol competition (bowling pin shoot) with my AR15.

Get yourself a pistol AR

[Gun Manufacturers]

Dont you guys understand? The bitch owned a gun, therefore she is directly responsible for her and her husbands death, and they had it coming.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest or repugnant about that claim at all!

I suppose that if she had NOT owned a gun, she'd never have been able to kill her husband and herself. Maybe by using someone elses gun?

According to several sources I found (including the one that I've included below), it appears that he shot her. Since he was a parole officer, he also would have had a firearm.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/all ... 1527.story

Then clearly law enforcement shouldn't have guns...

That would put a lot of firearms into the used firearms market, depressing the value. The lower price would be great, except right now, I still wouldn't be able to afford one.

You and me both.

Luckily I'm set for the short term.

I'm not. The local sportsman's club won't let me compete in their weekly pistol competition (bowling pin shoot) with my AR15.

Get yourself a pistol AR

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

[KaIashnikov]

I'm not. The local sportsman's club won't let me compete in their weekly pistol competition (bowling pin shoot) with my AR15.

If going to the firing range every week is wrong, I don't want to be right.

[Gimmadonis]

I'm not. The local sportsman's club won't let me compete in their weekly pistol competition (bowling pin shoot) with my AR15.

If going to the firing range every week is wrong, I don't want to be right.

They don't have firing ranges here. Shit sux.

[Skeptikosia]

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

That's the shoulder thing that goes up right?

[Renzenia]

An armed society is a polite society. Taking guns away from law abiding citizens would make things worse not better. How are you supposed to protect yourself, police officers dont do anything. I'm Pro-Gun and having a gun makes me feel secure. Americans would never let somebody take their guns away, if the government tried, it would be a shit storm.

[Gun Manufacturers]

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

That's the shoulder thing that goes up right?

Thank God she doesn't represent me.

[Skeptikosia]

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

That's the shoulder thing that goes up right?

Thank God she doesn't represent me.

She may not be your representative but she is decidedly indicative of the lack of mindset involved in the whole agenda.

[Mando-ade]

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

That's the shoulder thing that goes up right?

Thank God she doesn't represent me.

I hate this country sometimes, google barrelshroud and the first link quite clearly explains what it is and what it does.
IT'S A SAFETY MECHANISM. that's all, to keep people from accidently touching an overheated barrel.

[Gun Manufacturers]

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

That's the shoulder thing that goes up right?

Thank God she doesn't represent me.

I hate this country sometimes, google barrelshroud and the first link quite clearly explains what it is and what it does.
IT'S A SAFETY MECHANISM. that's all, to keep people from accidently touching an overheated barrel.

Apparently, it makes pistols more deadly according to the CT AWB. Also, apparently a pistol becomes more deadly if its unloaded weight increases to over 50 ounces.

[Gun Manufacturers]

I live in CT, the AR pistol you posted has too many "evil" features to be legal under the CT AWB (including the free float handguard/barrel shroud). That, and I can't afford one.

That's the shoulder thing that goes up right?

Thank God she doesn't represent me.

She may not be your representative but she is decidedly indicative of the lack of mindset involved in the whole agenda.

True, unfortunately.

[Erich Dahmer]

I wish I had a heat-seeking rounds.

It's also sort of funny when people whose only exposure to guns comes from movies and video games try to explain what they are and how they work. And completely fuck it up.