Jump to content

What is better, no guns, or more guns?


Recommended Posts

Just now, garybusey said:

 

Professor Choas chaotically moved goalposts as he sees fit.

 

WHO IS THIS SPORTS FIELD ALTERING MYSTERY MAN!

So, you, la grant, whatever pussies I'm leaving out spend 6p% of your posts responding with feelings of being butthurt about other posters than the rest of the 1,000 words epically saying nothing contextual or logical with just platitudes and anecdotal blathering which is nothing short of a 7th grade level.

 

Even if B-man, the south park avatar and LA Bills and so many others were wrong they'd be right in that they can actually compose a constructed argument and keep a debate in line.

 

Y'all lose just by pure sucking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

I have no doubt that it's easier to get heroin from the "drug house store" than it is to buy a gun. Far less paperwork.

 

Your comparison is still really stupid.

On the other hand... his ideas would make it just as easy to get a gun as it is to get heroin...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Koko78 said:

I have no doubt that it's easier to get heroin from the "drug house store" than it is to buy a gun. Far less paperwork.

 

Your comparison is still really stupid.

 

Well, if it's easier, then prove it. Koko, I will save us both the time — you can't.

 

Gun stores are on Yelp. Where can I find this "drug house store" where it's so easy to buy heroin, as you imagine? Offer stands. If you can find one within the same radius from the school from where the Parkland shooter purchased his legal gun, I'll buy you some heroin for your troubles.

 

Btw, good point on paperwork — what did the Parkland shooter need to fill out to make his purchase? Seems like it was pretty hassle-free for him to get. Legally.

 

You're correct that the comparison is really stupid, Koko, and in case you're in a haze and forgot how we got in this sandbar: you brought the conversation here with your absurd theoretical point. I'm showing you why it's stupid, fool.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Oh no, a dipShiff is trying to accuse me by using my "moved the goalposts" comment against me!

 

Pretty sure you have no clue what you're actually talking about, junior.

 

dipSchiff - chaotic term!

1 minute ago, Rockpile233 said:

Trump supporting age increase, bump stock ban (even if it takes EO), and bolstering the background check system!!

 

Can’t stop him from winning over gun nuts.

 

Winning!

 

 

Great! Let's see some action, then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

 

You're correct that the comparison is really stupid, Koko, and in case you're in a haze and forgot how we got in this sandbar: you brought the conversation here with your absurd theoretical point. I'm showing you why it's stupid, fool.

 

You're doing a pretty piss poor job of it, I might add.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Protecting freedom is more important and desirable than stopping mass shootings, which wouldn't be stopped by heavy gun restrictions anyway.  Factoring for population, mass shootings are not a uniquely American problem.

 

Mass shootings of random civilian targets is an American thing.

 

Death by way of using guns is also an American thing (relative to the rest of the Western World). 

 

The US has 10.64 gun related deaths per year, per 100,000 people (12th highest in the world). 

 

Canada checks in at 1.97 gun deaths, the UK at 0.23, and Australia at 0.93. 

 

Saying gun control doesn't work is just nonsense. 

Edited by jrober38
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Yet we have no issues with Planned Parenthood's firm grip on the "whole machine."  Wonder why that is.

 

 

I don't think they're the same.  I think the abortion issue (although you may not like the current legal status) is pretty much still determined democratically.  The guns issue is hijacked irretrievably by corporate interest.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

I don't think they're the same.  I think the abortion issue (although you may not like the current legal status) is pretty much still determined democratically.  The guns issue is hijacked irretrievably by corporate interest.

 

Yeah, a fiat declaration by a chronically overreaching court is determining things democratically.  I'm sure the deep south would like a word with you on that one.

 

5 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

To a fourth grader maybe

 

And sure, the death cult that is Planned Parenthood and her disciples who consistently equate their right to be sluts and have consequence-free sex with chopping up and vacuuming out a fetus aren't fetishizing abortion at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

I don't think they're the same.  I think the abortion issue (although you may not like the current legal status) is pretty much still determined democratically.  The guns issue is hijacked irretrievably by corporate interest.

I will concede that abortion should be legal if and when we eliminate child support, if the women doesn’t want to be a parent, then a male should have equal say in that decision considering it took both parties to create the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

And sure, the death cult that is Planned Parenthood and her disciples who consistently equate their right to be sluts and have consequence-free sex with chopping up and vacuuming out a fetus aren't fetishizing abortion at all.

 

...more fourth grader stuff.  Bravo.

 

Have you ever considered discussing something without screaming at people and making attacks?

Edited by Cugalabanza
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

I don't think they're the same.  I think the abortion issue (although you may not like the current legal status) is pretty much still determined democratically.  The guns issue is hijacked irretrievably by corporate interest.

 

By democratically you mean the cycle of Planned Parenthood's generous campaign contributions to Democrat candidates in exchange for continued Federal subsidies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

By democratically you mean the cycle of Planned Parenthood's generous campaign contributions to Democrat candidates in exchange for continued Federal subsidies

 

Yeah, no doubt PP is hugely influential.  It seems to me though that the tide on abortion might change.  Pence might be right about that.  The SCOTUS is changing.  It seems very possible.  I could be wrong, but the guns issue seems pretty locked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...