stop bringing up the founding fathers in gun arguments

[Lexical]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

However...it HAS BEEN PROVEN WITHOUT A DOUBT that gun legislation absolutely reduces mass killings by firearm.

Show me the proof please.

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by vaylorie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are scared of something that is about as statistically as likely as getting struck by lightning. Because you are scared, you want me to be afraid also and you want to remove my liberties. You don't get it. You let your fear control your decision making and wonder why I call you a fool.

Wait until you're part of that statistic. You might change your mind then.

You keep saying I'm afraid of something. You're dead wrong...just to let you know.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by hatelore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Alarti... If you spend another night on here arguing (c'mon man, its Saturday, you already wasted your Friday here) I am going to feel more bad for you then i did last night [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] please go have a life tonight, i am counting on you!

Lol i was on my phone riding the bus back from pikes place. Its also only 4:45. Also, you are here and its what 6:45 ish where you are? You dum broooo

[vaylorie]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[patriot1776]

the role of government is to take care of us and provide for our safety -alarti 2013

[OforOppression]

vaylorie just linked to 9gag

literally the biggest retard in a gaggle of retards

[vaylorie]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Wait until you're part of that statistic. You might change your mind then.

You keep saying I'm afraid of something. You're dead wrong...just to let you know.

If I am, I would be sad and I would grieve and I would probably be angry. These are expected human emotions in a time of tragedy. That being said, I wouldn't be angry at 'guns' nor would I be angry at the government for allowing the criminal to get access to a gun. I would blame the crazy or evil fucked-up guy that fucking did it. I certainly wouldn't want to remove your access to something just because someone went outside the law and abused it.

Removing liberties of law abiding citizens in order to do something that statistically has been shown to have no impact on the problem. That is ignorance.

[Humerox]

Regurgitating the statement "not statistically proven" is ignorant.

We both can come up with "statistics". I'm talking about ending mass murder by firearm. The Aussies did it, and did it right.

How you feel isn't changing the fact that the tide is turning against you. New York is getting it right.

[vaylorie]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How you feel isn't changing the fact that the tide is turning against you. New York is getting it right.

I sleep well at night knowing that my right to bear arms will not be infringed regardless of the feeble attempts of you lefties. Time and time again the Supreme Court has struck down restrictive gun laws and New York may be next.

Look, if you want to remove guns to reduce gun-based crime, you will be successful. Some of the gun crime will be turn into other types of violent crime and murder weapons and you will feel better feeling that you have solved a problem since deaths by guns will slightly decline while violent crime continues to grow. (again, look at Britain)

If you want to reduce violent crime (a.k.a. protect people / kids / etc.), then you have to actually evaluate the problem and statistically & historically a gun ban will not work.

If you want to reduce mass murders caused by guns, which have almost the same probability of happening as getting struck by lightning, then you can ban the guns and criminals will find an alternative weapon. Like fire, bomb, illegal assault weapon, etc. which still happen despite your saying they don't. You will be 'successful' because while mass killings still happen, they aren't done with guns. I use successful carefully since mass killings represent a fraction of 1% of homicides each year so you aren't really solving the problem.

If you really want to reduce mass murders, you can evaluate the commonalities from mass murderers and figure out where the likely problems live. You will find one primary box checked routinely when looking at a mass murderer in hindsight. Almost every one will have 'signs of mental illness shown prior to event'. That is where our focus should be, not trying to get rid of the weapon that the crazy person used.

[vaylorie]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

However...it HAS BEEN PROVEN WITHOUT A DOUBT that gun legislation absolutely reduces mass killings by firearm.

Originally Posted by Lexical [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Show me the proof please.

This is still pending also, lest you make hypocritical statements that can't be verified with facts.