What a special week to be a gun nut with 13 guns
Comments
-
Calling BS on the face off without referencing the designated meating place (7-11 on Aurora in the U-District, where I've pummel-fucked Slices and Topdawg on more occassions than I can imagine).OZONE said:
Must be a young, single, renter, with no family.
Full of bravado and gunpowder.
Yee Haw.
But if you want to call me a pussy to my face, let's set that up.
-
Where's your fully automatic weapon or tank? A background check is not an infringement.Blackie said:
"Shall not be infringed" and I had a good laugh at this.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
HTH -
I guess 9/11 and those 4,000 people were just a rounding error too?topdawgnc said:
The only way to have gun control, outside of using both hands, is to ban guns across the board via repealing the 2nd amendment.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
That is a simple fact supported by Chicago's death rate via handguns.
If I'm a nut case and I want to kill people ... I'm going to kill them. If I want to use a gun, I'm going to get a gun. If I can't get a gun, I'm going to use a pressure cooker ... or a big ass knife, or a car, or a pipe bomb.
So you want to reduce 10,000 to 8,000 ... GREAT! Statistically that's a rounding error. Put in all the gun "restrictions" you want ... but you will never get to zero. You are arguing an extreme deviation position, which can only be won on emotion.
Facts don't change because you want to ban guns.
I would also ask ... why are you and your friends so anxious to ban guns? Have you lost a loved one to a crazed shooter?
Where's your outrage over drunk driving, or drug addiction, child abuse?
Those items kill far more people every day than guns.
And why do you only show up on this subject when the media applies their latest faux outrage.
Why don't you care when the 3 year old African American is killed by a stray bullet from a gang banger who stole his gun from someone who passed a background check?
You put an awful lot of words in my mouth. Nice work. -
While I, and probably most here, would ackowledge that Top's post is depressing, we'd also have to agree with it as factual.topdawgnc said:
The only way to have gun control, outside of using both hands, is to ban guns across the board via repealing the 2nd amendment.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
That is a simple fact supported by Chicago's death rate via handguns.
If I'm a nut case and I want to kill people ... I'm going to kill them. If I want to use a gun, I'm going to get a gun. If I can't get a gun, I'm going to use a pressure cooker ... or a big ass knife, or a car, or a pipe bomb.
So you want to reduce 10,000 to 8,000 ... GREAT! Statistically that's a rounding error. Put in all the gun "restrictions" you want ... but you will never get to zero. You are arguing an extreme deviation position, which can only be won on emotion.
Facts don't change because you want to ban guns.
I would also ask ... why are you and your friends so anxious to ban guns? Have you lost a loved one to a crazed shooter?
Where's your outrage over drunk driving, or drug addiction, child abuse?
Those items kill far more people every day than guns.
And why do you only show up on this subject when the media applies their latest faux outrage.
Why don't you care when the 3 year old African American is killed by a stray bullet from a gang banger who stole his gun from someone who passed a background check?
If I thought there was even a 0.00001% chance that a full-on gun ban would reduce this shit by at least 50% I'd be all for it.
I'm fairly convinced it wouldn't do a damn thing. The Genie is out of the bottle. Too many guns out there. And more to the point, there are too many pressure cookers, pipes, moving vans, fertilizer, etc. etc.
Sure, the whole militia argument is for stupidities who think they need to defend themselves against the federal government. And even for those people, if you take their 30 ots aways, they'll just rent a Ryder and buy fertilizer.
Bottom line: you live in a dangerous world full of crazy fucks, and when your # is up, it's up. Period. Reach into your pants, feel around, and grab your ballz for Christ's sake. It's about all you can do. -
So what you are saying. That banning all guns wouldn't do anything. So we should just do nothing at all.creepycoug said:
While I, and probably most here, would ackowledge that Top's post is depressing, we'd also have to agree with it as factual.topdawgnc said:
The only way to have gun control, outside of using both hands, is to ban guns across the board via repealing the 2nd amendment.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
That is a simple fact supported by Chicago's death rate via handguns.
If I'm a nut case and I want to kill people ... I'm going to kill them. If I want to use a gun, I'm going to get a gun. If I can't get a gun, I'm going to use a pressure cooker ... or a big ass knife, or a car, or a pipe bomb.
So you want to reduce 10,000 to 8,000 ... GREAT! Statistically that's a rounding error. Put in all the gun "restrictions" you want ... but you will never get to zero. You are arguing an extreme deviation position, which can only be won on emotion.
Facts don't change because you want to ban guns.
I would also ask ... why are you and your friends so anxious to ban guns? Have you lost a loved one to a crazed shooter?
Where's your outrage over drunk driving, or drug addiction, child abuse?
Those items kill far more people every day than guns.
And why do you only show up on this subject when the media applies their latest faux outrage.
Why don't you care when the 3 year old African American is killed by a stray bullet from a gang banger who stole his gun from someone who passed a background check?
If I thought there was even a 0.00001% chance that a full-on gun ban would reduce this shit by at least 50% I'd be all for it.
I'm fairly convinced it wouldn't do a damn thing. The Genie is out of the bottle. Too many guns out there. And more to the point, there are too many pressure cookers, pipes, moving vans, fertilizer, etc. etc.
Sure, the whole militia argument is for stupidities who think they need to defend themselves against the federal government. And even for those people, if you take their 30 ots aways, they'll just rent a Ryder and buy fertilizer.
Bottom line: you live in a dangerous world full of crazy fucks, and when your # is up, it's up. Period. Reach into your pants, feel around, and grab your ballz for Christ's sake. It's about all you can do.
Do you realize how silly that statement is? -
Maybe we should make hijacking airplanes and crashing them into buildings illegal as well.2001400ex said:
I guess 9/11 and those 4,000 people were just a rounding error too?topdawgnc said:
The only way to have gun control, outside of using both hands, is to ban guns across the board via repealing the 2nd amendment.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
That is a simple fact supported by Chicago's death rate via handguns.
If I'm a nut case and I want to kill people ... I'm going to kill them. If I want to use a gun, I'm going to get a gun. If I can't get a gun, I'm going to use a pressure cooker ... or a big ass knife, or a car, or a pipe bomb.
So you want to reduce 10,000 to 8,000 ... GREAT! Statistically that's a rounding error. Put in all the gun "restrictions" you want ... but you will never get to zero. You are arguing an extreme deviation position, which can only be won on emotion.
Facts don't change because you want to ban guns.
I would also ask ... why are you and your friends so anxious to ban guns? Have you lost a loved one to a crazed shooter?
Where's your outrage over drunk driving, or drug addiction, child abuse?
Those items kill far more people every day than guns.
And why do you only show up on this subject when the media applies their latest faux outrage.
Why don't you care when the 3 year old African American is killed by a stray bullet from a gang banger who stole his gun from someone who passed a background check?
You put an awful lot of words in my mouth. Nice work. -
Actually it already is. And I'm sure you'd think that's an infringement on your rights too.Blackie said:
Maybe we should make hijacking airplanes and crashing them into buildings illegal as well.2001400ex said:
I guess 9/11 and those 4,000 people were just a rounding error too?topdawgnc said:
The only way to have gun control, outside of using both hands, is to ban guns across the board via repealing the 2nd amendment.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
That is a simple fact supported by Chicago's death rate via handguns.
If I'm a nut case and I want to kill people ... I'm going to kill them. If I want to use a gun, I'm going to get a gun. If I can't get a gun, I'm going to use a pressure cooker ... or a big ass knife, or a car, or a pipe bomb.
So you want to reduce 10,000 to 8,000 ... GREAT! Statistically that's a rounding error. Put in all the gun "restrictions" you want ... but you will never get to zero. You are arguing an extreme deviation position, which can only be won on emotion.
Facts don't change because you want to ban guns.
I would also ask ... why are you and your friends so anxious to ban guns? Have you lost a loved one to a crazed shooter?
Where's your outrage over drunk driving, or drug addiction, child abuse?
Those items kill far more people every day than guns.
And why do you only show up on this subject when the media applies their latest faux outrage.
Why don't you care when the 3 year old African American is killed by a stray bullet from a gang banger who stole his gun from someone who passed a background check?
You put an awful lot of words in my mouth. Nice work. -
That you would believe it isn't is absurd. Though not surprising.2001400ex said:
Where's your fully automatic weapon or tank? A background check is not an infringement.Blackie said:
"Shall not be infringed" and I had a good laugh at this.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
HTH -
It actually is a rounding error.2001400ex said:
I guess 9/11 and those 4,000 people were just a rounding error too?topdawgnc said:
The only way to have gun control, outside of using both hands, is to ban guns across the board via repealing the 2nd amendment.2001400ex said:
That's awfully dramatic. On so many ways. First, it's not a rewrite of the constitution or changing the fabric of our laws to require background checks on all sales. Among a few other common sense things we can do.topdawgnc said:The nut case with guns living next door to you is an interesting question.
Because it is not gun I worry about.
It is the nut case I fear.
If he is so fucked up he would take a gun and shoot people, he is fucked up enough to go on a knife rampage, or build pipe bombs, or go crazy behind the wheel of a car.
I love the drama around this subject, however, 10,000 people a year die from guns.
You want to change the fabric of the laws that support our country over statistically irrelevant causes of death.
Take all the gun owners in the country, divide that by the number of actual shooters who kill and the number would be far less than 1%.
Facts be damned ... and emotions rule when it comes to guns.
What if we can get that 10,000 down to 8,000. Isn't the 5 minutes for a background check to save thousands of lives, worth it?
That is a simple fact supported by Chicago's death rate via handguns.
If I'm a nut case and I want to kill people ... I'm going to kill them. If I want to use a gun, I'm going to get a gun. If I can't get a gun, I'm going to use a pressure cooker ... or a big ass knife, or a car, or a pipe bomb.
So you want to reduce 10,000 to 8,000 ... GREAT! Statistically that's a rounding error. Put in all the gun "restrictions" you want ... but you will never get to zero. You are arguing an extreme deviation position, which can only be won on emotion.
Facts don't change because you want to ban guns.
I would also ask ... why are you and your friends so anxious to ban guns? Have you lost a loved one to a crazed shooter?
Where's your outrage over drunk driving, or drug addiction, child abuse?
Those items kill far more people every day than guns.
And why do you only show up on this subject when the media applies their latest faux outrage.
Why don't you care when the 3 year old African American is killed by a stray bullet from a gang banger who stole his gun from someone who passed a background check?
You put an awful lot of words in my mouth. Nice work.
When you consider the number of people who die everyday for what ever reason.
You bring up a good point.
Those 4,000 people (and you are rounding up), were killed by a group of people who hijacked a plane.
Think about the logistics and thought that had to go into that process. All the regulation around getting a pilots license, all the security around airplanes, all the national intelligence used to protect citizens.
Yet in one three hour span they killed the equivalent of 60% of people who die by handgun every year.
So take your emotion, and shove it up your ass.
Root cause is not guns, it is crazy mother fuckers who are out to kill people in spectacular fashion. -
I have zero. Never have owned one. But support the 2nd amendment and the right to arm myself with as many as I want to whenever I chose to.OZONE said:
So how many guns do you need? Or are you too much of a pussy to admit it.haie said:What a great week to be a gun-hating pussy.
I'm not so much of an asshole that I pretend to know what's best for others.
You are though.
