Moderator: Community Team
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
thegreekdog wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:thegreekdog wrote:I'm not sure you disagree with me. I think you want to disagree with me because you want gun control in some form or fashion.
No, the point here is that the only thing you seemingly find yourself willing to talk about is the policies that are actually coming up for debate on the floor instead of what should optimally be done. If you want to bash Democrats or Republicans or whoever else, that's fine, but don't pretend you're contributing to the dialogue on gun control when you're admittedly off on some other vendetta of allegedly proving that Democrats and Republicans are the same.I find the Democrats' arguments almost as disgusting as the Republicans' arguments regarding gun control. But we'll put the Republicans' arguments to the side. Let's do everything the Democrats want to do. Let's ban the AR-15, let's ban "assault weapons," and let's provide background checks for everyone.
That's only a very small fraction of what most Democrats want to do. Those just happen to be the most politically feasible ones right now. If you got rid of the Republicans, we could have a lot more gun control than that.
I'm not pretending to contribute to the dialogue on gun control. This is a thread about American politics and how shitty they are. Semi-related, Amy Schumer tweeted today. Like Kim Kardashian, she would like to contribute to the dialogue on gun control by bashing the Republicans for fuck-all. Do you not understand how problematic it is for almost the entirety of the political class, including blogs, opinion pieces, and news reporting, to be focused on such an ineffective waste of everyone's time? The amount of actual and political and verbal capital be expended to outlaw AR-15s is so absurd and everyone should be outraged. But they aren't because they lack any type of knowledge and don't have the wherewithal or time to go get that knowledge.
All I hear most Democrats wanting to do is what they tell me they want to do. I don't have your mind reading device. I can probably assume that "first it's the AR-15s, then it's the handguns" is what most Democrats think, but I have no idea considering that the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns, not AR-15s or "assault weapons" or whatever the f*ck. So I would think the Democrats would say "handguns kill the most people every year, therefore we should start with handguns." Or put the handguns to the side for a second. If Democrats are interested in stopping only massacres like Orlando or Sandy Hook, they should determine how those people legally purchased guns (note, the Sandy Hook shooter stole the guns... stealing guns is illegal so we can't make that double illegal) and then solve that problem. Or they could determine what types of people do the killing and try to figure out how to solve that problem (mental health, gangs, lack of education).
Instead, we literally get big fights, with lots of attentions on ideas THAT WON'T FUCKING WORK AT ALL! Expelling all illegal immigrants would not have stopped Sandy Hook or Orlando. Banning AR-15s or assault weapons would not have stopped Sandy Hook or Orlando. If there was a handful of Democrats or Republicans that actually came up with a viable idea backed up by facts, then I wouldn't be angry. Instead CNN is reporting on fucking Kim Kardashian tweets about gun control and the Democrats "sitting in" on the House of Representatives like that's going to do anything. I saw one article... one... on the role the NRA has to play in this and that was a hit piece on how Trump is losing NRA support because he supports certain types of gun control.
tl;dr - f*ck off Mets.
a6mzero wrote:When the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment all the guns were muzzle loaders . Hard to kill 49 people unless they just stand there and let u reload for an hour.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
a6mzero wrote:When the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment all the guns were muzzle loaders . Hard to kill 49 people unless they just stand there and let u reload for an hour.
Borderdawg wrote:a6mzero wrote:When the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment all the guns were muzzle loaders . Hard to kill 49 people unless they just stand there and let u reload for an hour.
Actually, a muzzle loader can be loaded and fired 3-4 times per minute by anyone with average coordination and a decent amount of training. That's roughly 16-17 minutes to fire 49 shots. If you're gonna run your mouth, check your numbers. And the Orlando shooter was in the club for how long? Hell, in a crowded situation like that, a man with a pair of bowies could easily rack up a similar death toll in less time. For that matter, with a baseball bat.
with a baseball bat
Borderdawg wrote:a6mzero wrote:When the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment all the guns were muzzle loaders . Hard to kill 49 people unless they just stand there and let u reload for an hour.
Actually, a muzzle loader can be loaded and fired 3-4 times per minute by anyone with average coordination and a decent amount of training. That's roughly 16-17 minutes to fire 49 shots. If you're gonna run your mouth, check your numbers. And the Orlando shooter was in the club for how long? Hell, in a crowded situation like that, a man with a pair of bowies could easily rack up a similar death toll in less time. For that matter, with a baseball bat. Gun control the lib way DOES NOT, WILL NOT, AND NEVER HAS done one fooking thing to save a life. In fact, I'd venture to say that gun control has probably contributed to more deaths than it has prevented.
Borderdawg wrote:a6mzero wrote:When the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment all the guns were muzzle loaders . Hard to kill 49 people unless they just stand there and let u reload for an hour.
Actually, a muzzle loader can be loaded and fired 3-4 times per minute by anyone with average coordination and a decent amount of training. That's roughly 16-17 minutes to fire 49 shots. If you're gonna run your mouth, check your numbers. And the Orlando shooter was in the club for how long? Hell, in a crowded situation like that, a man with a pair of bowies could easily rack up a similar death toll in less time. For that matter, with a baseball bat. Gun control the lib way DOES NOT, WILL NOT, AND NEVER HAS done one fooking thing to save a life*. In fact, I'd venture to say that gun control has probably contributed to more deaths than it has prevented.*
mizery24 wrote:Explosion in Central Park!!
Home made bomb!!
I believe it is time to ban home made bombs in this country. If there were people around they could have been injured or killed.
Also, let's ban guns, lets not mention that there are Islamic extremists or and that US foreign policy has failed this region of the world. C'mon people!
jonesthecurl wrote:Serious question: can you buy gunpowder?
jonesthecurl wrote:Serious question: can you buy gunpowder?
Symmetry wrote:jonesthecurl wrote:Serious question: can you buy gunpowder?
Yeah- in fireworks. There tends to be age limits though.
jonesthecurl wrote:Symmetry wrote:jonesthecurl wrote:Serious question: can you buy gunpowder?
Yeah- in fireworks. There tends to be age limits though.
Well in quite a few states you can't buy fireworks, 'cos they're dangerous. Obviously unlike guns which are perfectly safe. That's why I was wondering about the gunpowder.
I know you can buy fireworks in most of the UK, but I suspect that unpacking the explosive from the firework would probably be illegal.
Dukasaur wrote:jonesthecurl wrote:Serious question: can you buy gunpowder?
Yes, you can buy gunpowder. At least you could, back when I was into guns. Don't know if anything has changed. But a lot of guys I knew back then made their own shells.
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users