This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - challengerX
Pages: 1 ... 131813191320 13211322 ... 1397
39571
« on: October 07, 2014, 05:50:45 AM »
Site works perfectly on mobile without any app.
39572
« on: October 07, 2014, 05:48:10 AM »
Nah.
39573
« on: October 07, 2014, 05:11:00 AM »
Oh boy prison pizza!
39574
« on: October 07, 2014, 05:01:23 AM »
K enjoy the newfags calling themselves Floodians and the massive circle jerk between like 10 of them and this ultra fag called Rain who threatens to kill himself every day for attention.
I could not make a more ebin forum choice if I tried. :^)
39575
« on: October 07, 2014, 04:27:02 AM »
Possessing explosives for recreational entertainment should not be a problem unless they are used dangerously. Of course you have no right to defend yourself with them in public as it causes collateral damage which you have no right to do. Also, rifles have their place just like handguns and shotguns. Rifles give you longer range and greater accuracy, not to mention greater ammunition capacity if you have multiple targets.
Except a city isn't a battlefield. You don't need an AR-15 to defend yourself from a group of assailants.
You also don't need a house. It just makes life a little easier. Anywhere can be a battlefield. Part of the reason we have an inalienable right to firearms and protection is to deter countries from invading and protect against a tyrannical government. Try doing that with just pistols and shotguns.
So shelter isn't necessary? The most important thing since the dawn of humanity? LOL No country can invade America. That isn't an excuse to have a small armory in your house. Try fighting a tyrannical government with an AR-15. No American soldier would turn on his country, and America will NEVER have a tyrannical government. Tyrants control our lives by slowly placing restrictions on what we can and can't do, where we can go, keeping us ignorant, and keeping us poor. Those are the tyrants of today. While you guys proudly hold your rifles in the air shouting about freedom, they're taking all the money out of your pockets, neighborhood, city. You guys are obsessed with this idea of a tyrannical government that will send the US military after you. Never gonna happen. And if they did send the military, you're screwed. An invading force could be beaten using guerrilla warfare and because they wouldn't know the terrain we'd be like a nightmarish Afghanistan to an invading force. You just don't need a rifle. And if somebody does invade, it won't happen overnight. Go buy an AR-15 or AK and a bunch of ammo and modify it to shoot full auto when things start getting hairy. Otherwise, it's extremely paranoid and calf out dumb to think you need a rifle right now.
39576
« on: October 06, 2014, 07:02:11 PM »
Possessing explosives for recreational entertainment should not be a problem unless they are used dangerously. Of course you have no right to defend yourself with them in public as it causes collateral damage which you have no right to do. Also, rifles have their place just like handguns and shotguns. Rifles give you longer range and greater accuracy, not to mention greater ammunition capacity if you have multiple targets.
Except a city isn't a battlefield. You don't need an AR-15 to defend yourself from a group of assailants.
39577
« on: October 06, 2014, 06:57:01 PM »
Can't quote on mobile but guess what Challenger? Crime has been DECREASING ever since the 1990s, as I said in an earlier post. Those who do commit gun cfimes are criminals, not law abiding citizens. Because how the heck can a person be law abiding when they commit crimes? Answer: can't. Gun restrictions ONLY hurt the good guy trying to protect themselves; just look at the cities or Detro, Chicago, D.C, etc and you will notice that murder there is some if the highest in the nation. That's because gun restrictions make innocent people prime targets
And Flee, thousands of people do die yearly but gun deaths are the lowest. The CDC has reported that the leading causes of death are instances like car accidents, drugs, and alcohol. We all know gun control is a political agenda, not one for "public safety". And refer to my statement above: Cities with strict gun laws account for the reason why people get killed with guns. Mass killings have also always occured in gun-free/gun strict states because the less amount of people with guns, the lesser the chance hey will be stopped before the cops arrive. The recent Oklahoma beheading was stooped by an employee who was xarrying a gun and if it were not for him then at least 2 more peoole would have been killed
Respinsibleand law abiding gun owners are not the problem and we seriously hate the fact that you try to make us the problem. Want to decrease gun crime? Push the effort and money into these bans from them and instead into community outreach programs and activities designed to give potential trouble youth a way to stay away fromma life of crime along with allowing people to have the ability to carry a gun where they please. There's a reason why you never here about a mass killing at a gun show: Because everybody has a damn gun there
I never said crime hasn't been decreasing. Ever.
Crime is high in places like Detroit and Chicago because of poverty and gangs. Crime =/= Deaths caused by guns
Why would anybody push for gun control if they weren't legitimately concerned about all the deaths caused by guns? Why would anybody alienate a large percentage of voters for no reason? Let me guess, to create a dictatorship? Get real. You act as if the thousands of deaths caused by guns don't matter. They do. These aren't just numbers, these are people with lives, family, friends, goals.
As for the last part, I think more effort should be put into getting rid of illegal guns and programs to help troubled kids in poor neighborhoods. Along with legalizing drugs, that would cut down on crime a shit ton.
However, it is far too easy to get a gun in America. Legally. Illegally it's easy as shit too. Which is why when I see people focusing on gun control I don't see it as progress, they're wasting time on having people sign more paperwork instead of actively going after an destroying illegal guns.
I don't trust people to carry a Glock with 18 rounds. The majority of people are dumb and can't keep calm in a dangerous situation. There should be laws put into place so the average idiot can't buy an arsenal of weaponry. There are a shit ton of examples of "law abiding citizens" making mistakes or just outright committing crimes with legally owned firearms. Not to mention their deranged relative stealing their gun and going on a killing rampage with it.
No, guns should not be easily accessible.
Did I say you said that? Read again because I said I said that.
Now we're on the same page. Gangs are formed out of economic issues and children from broken homes. Children, the biggest demographic of gangs, join them because they want to feel accepted and have a sense of importance. That translates into committing crime and crime is prevalent because of the decrease likelihood of a victim having a gun. Armed citizens act as a deterrent for criminals because the risk of being killed does not outweigh the gain from committing a robbery or burglary; I'm studying this exact stuff right now in college
Actually, it is to create a dictatorship in a sense. We overthrew the King George III because he was over-stepping his boundaries, just like the government is doing today. People are getting fed up with the government and it's evident with the number of militia groups growing every single day. Restricting the ability to own guns is preventing new waves of people from taking a stand against the government and keeping it in it's place. Funny enough that we idolize the Founding Fathers when they were doing the same exact thing people are doing today. On top of that, just a few months ago there was a Californian senator charged for arms trafficking and he was ANTI-GUN OWNERSHIP
Please, explain to me how I'm not caring about people dying? Good ole Challenger trying to make up lies in order to make himself look smart. All I said was that deaths resulting from crime is low compared to other causes of death and that going after the good guys won't stop bad guys
You want to get rid of illegal guns? Well you better hold the government responsible. Ever hear of Operation: Fast and Furious? Government sold Mexican cartels weapons, lost track of them, and the weapons were sold back to American criminals. Your tax dollars at work!
Legalize drugs, criminals will find something else to profit with. Going to legalize depleted uranium? Might as well because it will get to that eventually. Think realistically; crime and gang problems will never be dealt away with but they sure as hell can be controlled and greatly lowered. We can keep drugs like heroin, cocaine, oxy, etc illegal while developing programs to give kids a chance and a positive environment to feel accepted in while creating harsher penalties for people that commit gang related crime instead of giving them a reduced sentence or probation
Background checks don't need to take a week to complete. Fill out information, send it off to the government, and they run it through a national database and instantly they get a report back. Maybe 15+ years ago when we didn't have access to this technology I would agree on increasing the wait period but we have the technology now.
Average idiot? Really? Get a grip will you. There's nothing idiotic with owning multiple guns and carrying a weapon legally. As I pointed out with the recent Oklahoma beheading, if it were not for an employee carrying then more than 1 person would be dead. I personally own 5 rifles and my dad owns 3 handguns and 2 shotguns. And guess what? I'm going to keep buying guns and only need a $100 till I go out and buy a Romanian WASR 10/63 with a 75-round drum magazine. I fracking love being an American and I fracking love owning guns. That will NEVER be taken away from me
Now reply and let's continue this pointless discussion. Nothing I or you saw will change our opinions. I used to be very anti-gun myself but learned about them and now love them just as much as God and my family
I grew up in LA. I don't need you to tell me about gangs and poverty.
I didn't say anything about having a shotty or pistol in the house. It's carrying guns in public that I don't agree with.
Nobody's overstepping boundaries. You don't need an arsenal of rifles unless you're going to use them. Guns are not toys. This is exactly why I don't like the lax gun laws and the loophole that allows people to buy guns at a gun show. I couldn't care less about some corrupt politician. And I am well aware of how the U.S. government "lost" a bunch of guns and how they ended up in cartel hands. Or how Freeway Ricky flooded LA with coke and crack with people mixed up with the CIA.
Because you're looking at it as a statistic. Whether or not the numbers are low compare dot something else is irrelevant. Shit, rocket launchers have killed less people than nukes, his come we can't get a permit to buy those? Or how about setting up turrets on our houses? That is ridiculous logic. I hesitate to even use the word logic.
Are you serious? Depleted uranium? You seriously think your local street gang is going to survive off that? You can make $3,000 dollars a day selling crack. EASY. On a slow day. Take that away and suddenly joining a gang and cooking up work seems a lot less appealing.
What the hell are you talking about? Are you completely ignorant of gang injunctions? Committing a crime whilst being a gang member increases your sentence a SHIT TON. Something that's get you 2 years could get you 10 if you're a gang member. Wearing a white T shirt is a criminal offense if you're a gang member in California.
It's not about wait times. It's about not allowing the average person to buy a bunch of rifles. If you don't need them, don't buy them. They're not toys or collectables. They're weapons. Show some respect and maturity.
I couldn't care less what gun you're going to buy and how you think that's the best part of being an American, or that someone is less American for not buying guns by the boat load.
I like guns. Doesn't mean I'd buy a truck load of em unless I needed to. There's nothing to love. If you look at a gun as anything other than a tool or weapon, you're compensating for something and have major insecurities.
This is a pointless conversation. Reason is wasted on the reasonless.
Going to correct you on a couple things.
1. There is no gun show loophole. There maybe two or three guys that bring a gun and have a for sale paper on it, but that's it. Everybody else that sells guns are either federally licensed and have to conduct background checks or are selling weapons that were made before 1899 and no paperwork or licenses are needed. Don't ever hear about people killing people with muskets do you?
After attending multiple gun shows over the past few years, I can assure you this whole "gun show loophole" is an EXTREMELY twisted and false idea portrayed by the left because they have no firearms knowledge. Out of the people who sell guns at gun shows, around 98% are those sold by people required to conduct checks, 1.9% who sell pre-1899 guns, and .1% who just sell a gun privately
2. I do use all my guns. Every time I head to the range I mix it up and take different guns. All are equally used
3. It's perfectly legal to purchase and own a RPG/rocket launcher. They're highly restricted, require a speacial license, have to go through extensive checks, and need to get the chief of police to sign a piece of paper. Plus they're VERY expensive to own
4. Well, cars kill more people than guns annually but people collect them. Swords and knives also kill people and they're collected. Guns are collectible; there's a reason why people specialize in curio and relic firearms and I have 3 myself
1. I mean the private sale loophole. 2. That isn't what I mean. You don't need rifles unless you're fighting a group of people or you're going to hunt, or you're protecting your house from dangerous wildlife. 3. I know you can buy an RPG. My point was why not make it common place and easy? Responsible gun owners right? An RPG in every home keeps the commies away. 4. Cars aren't weapons. They're modes of transport. I don't agree with having things you don't need, but a car collection can be cool and isn't a hazard. Having a bunch of guns is just stupid if you don't need them. They're not collectible items, they're weapons. Ancient guns in a museum is at least preserving history.
39578
« on: October 06, 2014, 06:42:51 PM »
Yeah I had a real good friend who's Jewish. His dad was such a cheapskate.
39579
« on: October 06, 2014, 06:36:36 PM »
It seems we'll never know how big gangs contribute, actually, nor would I ever trust the F.B.I. to have an accurate account.
http://usconservatives.about.com/od/capitalpunishment/a/Putting-Gun-Death-Statistics-In-Perspective.htm
>disagreeing with the official National Gang Center, an institution by the federal Department of Justice
>linking usconservatives.about.com instead
Camnator pls. When an institution of the DoJ brings forth the statistical fact that gang-related killings only make up a fraction of all the gun homicides in the US, you're going to have do a lot better than this to refute it.
No worse than that junk Huffington Post. You're also assuming the DOJ is at all credible. It's littered with criminals that wish to spread fear in order to keep their bogus existence.
It's far worse. Huffington Post is shitty, but your site is worse than Fox News.
Besides, the point of my article is that it has facts pulled from valid and unbiased places. The article is irrelevant.
Nothing is worse than Huffington Post, though.Those "facts" are definitely from biased sources that no one should trust. And it really irrelevant. It's been shown time after time strict gun control only makes things worse for everyone. You said it yourself prohibition doesn't work with alcohol, so why would you conclude it would work with firearms?
Let me guess, the illuminati tampered with the facts?
No it was the lizard people.
DAMN IT THAT WAS MY NEXT GUESS
39580
« on: October 06, 2014, 06:31:34 PM »
It seems we'll never know how big gangs contribute, actually, nor would I ever trust the F.B.I. to have an accurate account.
http://usconservatives.about.com/od/capitalpunishment/a/Putting-Gun-Death-Statistics-In-Perspective.htm
>disagreeing with the official National Gang Center, an institution by the federal Department of Justice
>linking usconservatives.about.com instead
Camnator pls. When an institution of the DoJ brings forth the statistical fact that gang-related killings only make up a fraction of all the gun homicides in the US, you're going to have do a lot better than this to refute it.
No worse than that junk Huffington Post. You're also assuming the DOJ is at all credible. It's littered with criminals that wish to spread fear in order to keep their bogus existence.
It's far worse. Huffington Post is shitty, but your site is worse than Fox News.
Besides, the point of my article is that it has facts pulled from valid and unbiased places. The article is irrelevant.
Nothing is worse than Huffington Post, though.Those "facts" are definitely from biased sources that no one should trust. And it really irrelevant. It's been shown time after time strict gun control only makes things worse for everyone. You said it yourself prohibition doesn't work with alcohol, so why would you conclude it would work with firearms?
Let me guess, the illuminati tampered with the facts?
39581
« on: October 06, 2014, 06:30:06 PM »
Can't quote on mobile but guess what Challenger? Crime has been DECREASING ever since the 1990s, as I said in an earlier post. Those who do commit gun cfimes are criminals, not law abiding citizens. Because how the heck can a person be law abiding when they commit crimes? Answer: can't. Gun restrictions ONLY hurt the good guy trying to protect themselves; just look at the cities or Detro, Chicago, D.C, etc and you will notice that murder there is some if the highest in the nation. That's because gun restrictions make innocent people prime targets
And Flee, thousands of people do die yearly but gun deaths are the lowest. The CDC has reported that the leading causes of death are instances like car accidents, drugs, and alcohol. We all know gun control is a political agenda, not one for "public safety". And refer to my statement above: Cities with strict gun laws account for the reason why people get killed with guns. Mass killings have also always occured in gun-free/gun strict states because the less amount of people with guns, the lesser the chance hey will be stopped before the cops arrive. The recent Oklahoma beheading was stooped by an employee who was xarrying a gun and if it were not for him then at least 2 more peoole would have been killed
Respinsibleand law abiding gun owners are not the problem and we seriously hate the fact that you try to make us the problem. Want to decrease gun crime? Push the effort and money into these bans from them and instead into community outreach programs and activities designed to give potential trouble youth a way to stay away fromma life of crime along with allowing people to have the ability to carry a gun where they please. There's a reason why you never here about a mass killing at a gun show: Because everybody has a damn gun there
I never said crime hasn't been decreasing. Ever.
Crime is high in places like Detroit and Chicago because of poverty and gangs. Crime =/= Deaths caused by guns
Why would anybody push for gun control if they weren't legitimately concerned about all the deaths caused by guns? Why would anybody alienate a large percentage of voters for no reason? Let me guess, to create a dictatorship? Get real. You act as if the thousands of deaths caused by guns don't matter. They do. These aren't just numbers, these are people with lives, family, friends, goals.
As for the last part, I think more effort should be put into getting rid of illegal guns and programs to help troubled kids in poor neighborhoods. Along with legalizing drugs, that would cut down on crime a shit ton.
However, it is far too easy to get a gun in America. Legally. Illegally it's easy as shit too. Which is why when I see people focusing on gun control I don't see it as progress, they're wasting time on having people sign more paperwork instead of actively going after an destroying illegal guns.
I don't trust people to carry a Glock with 18 rounds. The majority of people are dumb and can't keep calm in a dangerous situation. There should be laws put into place so the average idiot can't buy an arsenal of weaponry. There are a shit ton of examples of "law abiding citizens" making mistakes or just outright committing crimes with legally owned firearms. Not to mention their deranged relative stealing their gun and going on a killing rampage with it.
No, guns should not be easily accessible.
Did I say you said that? Read again because I said I said that.
Now we're on the same page. Gangs are formed out of economic issues and children from broken homes. Children, the biggest demographic of gangs, join them because they want to feel accepted and have a sense of importance. That translates into committing crime and crime is prevalent because of the decrease likelihood of a victim having a gun. Armed citizens act as a deterrent for criminals because the risk of being killed does not outweigh the gain from committing a robbery or burglary; I'm studying this exact stuff right now in college
Actually, it is to create a dictatorship in a sense. We overthrew the King George III because he was over-stepping his boundaries, just like the government is doing today. People are getting fed up with the government and it's evident with the number of militia groups growing every single day. Restricting the ability to own guns is preventing new waves of people from taking a stand against the government and keeping it in it's place. Funny enough that we idolize the Founding Fathers when they were doing the same exact thing people are doing today. On top of that, just a few months ago there was a Californian senator charged for arms trafficking and he was ANTI-GUN OWNERSHIP
Please, explain to me how I'm not caring about people dying? Good ole Challenger trying to make up lies in order to make himself look smart. All I said was that deaths resulting from crime is low compared to other causes of death and that going after the good guys won't stop bad guys
You want to get rid of illegal guns? Well you better hold the government responsible. Ever hear of Operation: Fast and Furious? Government sold Mexican cartels weapons, lost track of them, and the weapons were sold back to American criminals. Your tax dollars at work!
Legalize drugs, criminals will find something else to profit with. Going to legalize depleted uranium? Might as well because it will get to that eventually. Think realistically; crime and gang problems will never be dealt away with but they sure as hell can be controlled and greatly lowered. We can keep drugs like heroin, cocaine, oxy, etc illegal while developing programs to give kids a chance and a positive environment to feel accepted in while creating harsher penalties for people that commit gang related crime instead of giving them a reduced sentence or probation
Background checks don't need to take a week to complete. Fill out information, send it off to the government, and they run it through a national database and instantly they get a report back. Maybe 15+ years ago when we didn't have access to this technology I would agree on increasing the wait period but we have the technology now.
Average idiot? Really? Get a grip will you. There's nothing idiotic with owning multiple guns and carrying a weapon legally. As I pointed out with the recent Oklahoma beheading, if it were not for an employee carrying then more than 1 person would be dead. I personally own 5 rifles and my dad owns 3 handguns and 2 shotguns. And guess what? I'm going to keep buying guns and only need a $100 till I go out and buy a Romanian WASR 10/63 with a 75-round drum magazine. I fracking love being an American and I fracking love owning guns. That will NEVER be taken away from me
Now reply and let's continue this pointless discussion. Nothing I or you saw will change our opinions. I used to be very anti-gun myself but learned about them and now love them just as much as God and my family
I grew up in LA. I don't need you to tell me about gangs and poverty. I didn't say anything about having a shotty or pistol in the house. It's carrying guns in public that I don't agree with. Nobody's overstepping boundaries. You don't need an arsenal of rifles unless you're going to use them. Guns are not toys. This is exactly why I don't like the lax gun laws and the loophole that allows people to buy guns at a gun show. I couldn't care less about some corrupt politician. And I am well aware of how the U.S. government "lost" a bunch of guns and how they ended up in cartel hands. Or how Freeway Ricky flooded LA with coke and crack with people mixed up with the CIA. Because you're looking at it as a statistic. Whether or not the numbers are low compare dot something else is irrelevant. Shit, rocket launchers have killed less people than nukes, his come we can't get a permit to buy those? Or how about setting up turrets on our houses? That is ridiculous logic. I hesitate to even use the word logic. Are you serious? Depleted uranium? You seriously think your local street gang is going to survive off that? You can make $3,000 dollars a day selling crack. EASY. On a slow day. Take that away and suddenly joining a gang and cooking up work seems a lot less appealing. What the hell are you talking about? Are you completely ignorant of gang injunctions? Committing a crime whilst being a gang member increases your sentence a SHIT TON. Something that's get you 2 years could get you 10 if you're a gang member. Wearing a white T shirt is a criminal offense if you're a gang member in California. It's not about wait times. It's about not allowing the average person to buy a bunch of rifles. If you don't need them, don't buy them. They're not toys or collectables. They're weapons. Show some respect and maturity. I couldn't care less what gun you're going to buy and how you think that's the best part of being an American, or that someone is less American for not buying guns by the boat load. I like guns. Doesn't mean I'd buy a truck load of em unless I needed to. There's nothing to love. If you look at a gun as anything other than a tool or weapon, you're compensating for something and have major insecurities. This is a pointless conversation. Reason is wasted on the reasonless.
39582
« on: October 06, 2014, 05:56:18 PM »
So tell me.
I've gone back to eating mostly salads, with spinach and the dark green and purple spiky stuff, and red win vinegar dressing, and I generally only drink skim milk. So why am I not losing weight?
Your body is being starved and it has adapted to the low amount of calories it gets.
Yeah, but supermodels do it, so why isn't it working for me?
They don't eat and they still do a lot of exercise. Do you exercise?
No, that's why I don't eat a lot.
Well you just have to look at calories in vs calories out. Walk in the park for 30 minutes on an empty stomach. I hear that's good for losing weight.
I walk my dog for like 40 minutes without breakfast. And then again far after I've had lunch. Huh. Maybe I am exercising. Sort of.
39583
« on: October 06, 2014, 05:52:33 PM »
Just eat natural above all. The less artificial garbage in your system the better. I don't even exercise or play sports anymore. I walk my dog twice a day and that's it. I just eat right and resist eating out of anxiety.
Really, it's very important to eat naturally. Fruit can be far sweeter and more sour than most candy. Doesn't mean you shouldn't have candy, but don't underestimate how fucking tasty fruit is. Not to mention the shit ton of vitamins and nutrition it gives you. Nuts also are extremely nutritious and tasty. Don't overdo the nuts, though. Soda isn't a good idea, but I'm not one to talk because I have soda all the time. Sue me.
I'm not even chubby. Of course, some people get fatter than others much quicker and all that shit, but consult a doctor if you need. Otherwise, just eat as natural as you can. Eat what the Earth gives us, not what some jackass trying to line his pockets makes in a factory with chemicals. He doesn't give two shits about how unhealthy his snack or food is.
39584
« on: October 06, 2014, 05:31:02 PM »
It seems we'll never know how big gangs contribute, actually, nor would I ever trust the F.B.I. to have an accurate account.
http://usconservatives.about.com/od/capitalpunishment/a/Putting-Gun-Death-Statistics-In-Perspective.htm
>disagreeing with the official National Gang Center, an institution by the federal Department of Justice
>linking usconservatives.about.com instead
Camnator pls. When an institution of the DoJ brings forth the statistical fact that gang-related killings only make up a fraction of all the gun homicides in the US, you're going to have do a lot better than this to refute it.
No worse than that junk Huffington Post. You're also assuming the DOJ is at all credible. It's littered with criminals that wish to spread fear in order to keep their bogus existence.
It's far worse. Huffington Post is shitty, but your site is worse than Fox News. Besides, the point of my article is that it has facts pulled from valid and unbiased places. The article is irrelevant.
39585
« on: October 06, 2014, 05:13:10 PM »
Can't quote on mobile but guess what Challenger? Crime has been DECREASING ever since the 1990s, as I said in an earlier post. Those who do commit gun cfimes are criminals, not law abiding citizens. Because how the heck can a person be law abiding when they commit crimes? Answer: can't. Gun restrictions ONLY hurt the good guy trying to protect themselves; just look at the cities or Detro, Chicago, D.C, etc and you will notice that murder there is some if the highest in the nation. That's because gun restrictions make innocent people prime targets
And Flee, thousands of people do die yearly but gun deaths are the lowest. The CDC has reported that the leading causes of death are instances like car accidents, drugs, and alcohol. We all know gun control is a political agenda, not one for "public safety". And refer to my statement above: Cities with strict gun laws account for the reason why people get killed with guns. Mass killings have also always occured in gun-free/gun strict states because the less amount of people with guns, the lesser the chance hey will be stopped before the cops arrive. The recent Oklahoma beheading was stooped by an employee who was xarrying a gun and if it were not for him then at least 2 more peoole would have been killed
Respinsibleand law abiding gun owners are not the problem and we seriously hate the fact that you try to make us the problem. Want to decrease gun crime? Push the effort and money into these bans from them and instead into community outreach programs and activities designed to give potential trouble youth a way to stay away fromma life of crime along with allowing people to have the ability to carry a gun where they please. There's a reason why you never here about a mass killing at a gun show: Because everybody has a damn gun there
I never said crime hasn't been decreasing. Ever. Crime is high in places like Detroit and Chicago because of poverty and gangs. Crime =/= Deaths caused by guns Why would anybody push for gun control if they weren't legitimately concerned about all the deaths caused by guns? Why would anybody alienate a large percentage of voters for no reason? Let me guess, to create a dictatorship? Get real. You act as if the thousands of deaths caused by guns don't matter. They do. These aren't just numbers, these are people with lives, family, friends, goals. As for the last part, I think more effort should be put into getting rid of illegal guns and programs to help troubled kids in poor neighborhoods. Along with legalizing drugs, that would cut down on crime a shit ton. However, it is far too easy to get a gun in America. Legally. Illegally it's easy as shit too. Which is why when I see people focusing on gun control I don't see it as progress, they're wasting time on having people sign more paperwork instead of actively going after an destroying illegal guns. I don't trust people to carry a Glock with 18 rounds. The majority of people are dumb and can't keep calm in a dangerous situation. There should be laws put into place so the average idiot can't buy an arsenal of weaponry. There are a shit ton of examples of "law abiding citizens" making mistakes or just outright committing crimes with legally owned firearms. Not to mention their deranged relative stealing their gun and going on a killing rampage with it. No, guns should not be easily accessible.
39586
« on: October 06, 2014, 03:29:31 PM »
I stand corrected, I apologize.
It's cool.
39587
« on: October 06, 2014, 02:13:39 PM »
forbes DROPPED
I'm sorry, is Forbes known for being agenda-driven like Huffpost?
I'd get it if I had posted Breitbart or Fox, but come on. Why are you so butthurt all the time?
So when I do it, I'm butthurt, but when you do it, it's a push for an unbiased source?
You're always butthurt, all the time, it seems like.
You weren't looking for an unbiased source, you were still butthurt that I won't take Huffingpost's twisted narrative.
He's butthurt because he disagrees with you?
Again, the article isn't all that important. It's the links in the article.
His tone makes it pretty clear.
And whether or not most gun crime is gang-related is irrelevant, because the fact still stands that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with either illegally obtained weapons or ones borrowed from family or friends. Law-abiding gun owners are not the problem here.
>gets proven wrong
>HURR ITS IRRELEVANT
Come on bro. This is the Serious section. Provide a source for your claims. These angelic "law abiding gun owners" are regular people who happen to have a license which allows them to carry a weapon capable of killing several people. A lot of them snap and use their gun to commit crimes, a lot of people accidentally commit suicide, a lot of people accidentally kill family members.
I don't trust people to drive correctly. I'm supposed to feel safe because Johnny Two Guns is on the case? Give me a fućking break. People are dumbasses and you know it.
Not a lot actually. A very small number, honestly.
You have a very cynical worldview. We might as well ban cars and alcohol while we're at it, since people can snap and get hurt with those.
Cars are necessary. Prohibition didn't work. You don't need to carry a gun unless you have a real reason to fear for your life. Having a gun in the house is a different story.
39588
« on: October 06, 2014, 02:09:22 PM »
forbes DROPPED
I'm sorry, is Forbes known for being agenda-driven like Huffpost?
I'd get it if I had posted Breitbart or Fox, but come on. Why are you so butthurt all the time?
So when I do it, I'm butthurt, but when you do it, it's a push for an unbiased source?
You're always butthurt, all the time, it seems like.
You weren't looking for an unbiased source, you were still butthurt that I won't take Huffingpost's twisted narrative.
He's butthurt because he disagrees with you?
Again, the article isn't all that important. It's the links in the article.
His tone makes it pretty clear.
And whether or not most gun crime is gang-related is irrelevant, because the fact still stands that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with either illegally obtained weapons or ones borrowed from family or friends. Law-abiding gun owners are not the problem here.
>gets proven wrong
>HURR ITS IRRELEVANT
Come on bro. This is the Serious section. Provide a source for your claims. These angelic "law abiding gun owners" are regular people who happen to have a license which allows them to carry a weapon capable of killing several people. A lot of them snap and use their gun to commit crimes, a lot of people accidentally commit suicide, a lot of people accidentally kill family members.
I don't trust people to drive correctly. I'm supposed to feel safe because Johnny Two Guns is on the case? Give me a fućking break. People are dumbasses and you know it.
lolno
How about YOU provide a source for YOUR claims? And don't give a left-wing backed source either
http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/survey-analysis/measuring-the-extent-of-gang-problemsGang violence is not the reason there's so many gun related deaths. Totally unbiased source. Told status: Told [•] Not told[ ]
39589
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:57:49 PM »
I love how people who buy a product act all superior about it as if they invented and created it with their own two hands.
Then again, you are 12.
39590
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:47:01 PM »
"Hey guys, let's do away with moral priorities because both sides have done wrong things!"
I'd sooner shoot a serial killer than a second-degree murderer.
Oh frack you forget who created the serial killer, and the second-degree murderer, well to avoid getting first degree murder charges plans out the murder in a way that the person commits suicide or kills themselves in an accident. Remember how the wall keeps out everything where the fishing industry doesn't even exist and that is a big food source for the people. Starvation and being treated as second class citizens.
u wot lad Your posts are so confusing to read.
39591
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:45:14 PM »
forbes DROPPED
I'm sorry, is Forbes known for being agenda-driven like Huffpost?
I'd get it if I had posted Breitbart or Fox, but come on. Why are you so butthurt all the time?
So when I do it, I'm butthurt, but when you do it, it's a push for an unbiased source?
You're always butthurt, all the time, it seems like.
You weren't looking for an unbiased source, you were still butthurt that I won't take Huffingpost's twisted narrative.
He's butthurt because he disagrees with you?
Again, the article isn't all that important. It's the links in the article.
His tone makes it pretty clear.
And whether or not most gun crime is gang-related is irrelevant, because the fact still stands that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with either illegally obtained weapons or ones borrowed from family or friends. Law-abiding gun owners are not the problem here.
>gets proven wrong >HURR ITS IRRELEVANT Come on bro. This is the Serious section. Provide a source for your claims. These angelic "law abiding gun owners" are regular people who happen to have a license which allows them to carry a weapon capable of killing several people. A lot of them snap and use their gun to commit crimes, a lot of people accidentally commit suicide, a lot of people accidentally kill family members. I don't trust people to drive correctly. I'm supposed to feel safe because Johnny Two Guns is on the case? Give me a fućking break. People are dumbasses and you know it.
39592
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:31:08 PM »
forbes DROPPED
I'm sorry, is Forbes known for being agenda-driven like Huffpost?
I'd get it if I had posted Breitbart or Fox, but come on. Why are you so butthurt all the time?
So when I do it, I'm butthurt, but when you do it, it's a push for an unbiased source?
You're always butthurt, all the time, it seems like.
You weren't looking for an unbiased source, you were still butthurt that I won't take Huffingpost's twisted narrative.
He's butthurt because he disagrees with you? Again, the article isn't all that important. It's the links in the article.
39593
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:28:33 PM »
HAMAS IS A PEGBOY
39594
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:59:39 PM »
This is from huffpost,
DROPPED
Their sources are legit. Look up the article. It's not what they're writing, it's the fact that gang related homicides with guns makes up a tiny fraction of deaths caused by guns. There's nothing to debate. It's pure fact. Look up the statistics on Google.
39595
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:50:30 PM »
inb4 idiots
39596
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:44:40 PM »
The average gun owner isn't commiting mass shootings though, so I don't see the need for mistrust.
The fact that every single year thousands of your otherwise typical and average gun owner end up shooting and killing someone else seems like a sufficient reason to me.
Most gun crime is from gangs. Again thousands compared to 60 million is pretty small in comparison.
In a scathing critique of ABC's recent report "Young Guns," Dana Loesch stated that most gun deaths were the result of gang violence; therefore, America has a gang problem, not a gun problem. Her claim appears to be supported by sites positing that "a staggering 80 percent of gun homicides are gang-related." As it turns out though, not only is her statement factually incorrect, as the majority of gun deaths are suicides, but there is not a shred of evidence to support her characterization that gangs are the driving force behind firearm violence.
Unfortunately, Dana Loesch's sentiment is shared by many gun advocates, including the Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, who, when opposing firearm background checks said, "President Obama should be as committed to dealing with the gang problem that is tormenting honest people in his hometown as he is to blaming law-abiding gun owners for the acts of psychopathic murderers."
So, do we have a gang problem or a gun problem? Data collected by the National Gang Center, the government agency responsible for cataloging gang violence, makes clear that it's the latter. There were 1,824 gang-related killings in 2011. This total includes deaths by means other than a gun. The Bureau of Justice Statistics finds this number to be even lower, identifying a little more than 1,000 gang-related homicides in 2008. In comparison, there were 11,101 homicides and 19,766 suicides committed with firearms in 2011.
According to the Federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), the number of gangs and gang members has been on the rise for some time now, increasing by more than one-third in the past decade. Between 2010 and 2011, for example, there was a 3 percent increase in the number of gangs, but an 8 percent decrease in gang-related homicides. If gang violence was truly driving the gun homicide rate, we should not see gang membership and gun homicide rates moving in opposite directions.
The most recent Centers for Disease Control study on this subject lends further credence to our claim. It examined five cities that met the criterion for having a high prevalence of gang homicides: Los Angeles, California; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Long Beach, California; Oakland, California; and Newark, New Jersey. In these cities, a total of 856 gang and 2,077 non-gang homicides were identified and included in the analyses. So, even when examining cities with the largest gang problems, gang homicides only accounted for 29 percent of the total for the period under consideration (2003-2008). For the nation as a whole it would be much smaller.
The 80 percent of gang-related gun homicides figure purporting to support Loesch's claim, then, is not only false, but off by nearly a factor of five. The direct opposite is necessarily true: more than 80 percent of gun homicides are non-gang related. While gang violence is still a serious problem that needs to be addressed, it is disingenuous to assert that the vast majority of our gun problem (even excluding suicides) is caused by gangs.
In spite of this, LaPierre's proposed solution to gun violence is to "contact every U.S. Attorney and ask them to bring at least 10 cases per month against drug dealers, gang members and other violent felons caught illegally possessing firearms." That same CDC study, however, also refutes LaPierre's claim that the drug trade is fueling gun-violence, saying, "the proportion of gang homicides resulting from drug trade/use or with other crimes in progress was consistently low in the five cities, ranging from zero to 25 percent." Furthermore, a 2005 study done by Cook, Ludwig and Braga found that nearly three in five homicide offenders in Illinois in 2001 did not have a felony conviction within the 10 years prior to the homicide. Looking at just violent felons excludes a huge subset of potential criminals that become violent in the presence of a firearm.
Gun advocates' blind focus on gangs, drugs and violent felons overlooks the larger gun problem facing America. It is irresponsible and disingenuous for some of us to brush off our staggering death toll from firearms merely as the product of gangs or even violent criminals. Recognizing America's high homicide rate for what it is -- a gun problem -- is the first step in solving it. This is from huffpost, I tried linking it but when I clicked the link in the preview it takes me to a 404. I'm on mobile and for some reason I just can't link. You can find it in google search though, it's called "Do we have a gang problem or gun problem?".
39597
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:36:32 PM »
It's the Ghosts. Tom Clancy called it yet again.
39598
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:34:47 PM »
There wasn't much to topple, Kim just inherited his fathers position, he really wasn't raised to be a leader. Toppling Kim was quite literally taking candy from a rather chubby baby.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
39599
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:30:35 PM »
People who think all Muslims are terrorists are bigots. They don't need their own fancy new word. Does the West have an unwarranted hate for Muslims? Not exactly, but many people go overboard and those people tend to be the type that hate gays and atheists and practically anybody who isn't part of their little sect.
39600
« on: October 06, 2014, 09:49:11 AM »
Cool it people <.<
Kinder getting down and dirty with someone other than ChallengerX? I feel like the fine familiarities and intrigue of the Flood Soap Opera are taking a turn for the interesting.
:^)
Shall I make a guest appearance?
No.
 >mfw people hate on my swag
Pages: 1 ... 131813191320 13211322 ... 1397
|
Show Posts
