Guns don't kill people, gun owners kill people.

[justanotherbozo]

OK. Thank you. I had to break it into paragraphs to read it, but that is just my les-dixia or whatever it is called.

no it's not bro although i have to admit i no longer waste any time trying to decipher his hogwash, or anyone elses who writes like that for that matter.

but he in particular is not only a fool, he is a passive/aggressive asshole not worthy of my time, nor yours either in my opinion.

frankly, there are only a few posters in this thread with any sense, the rest are just the same libtard idiots who elected this current administration and all are living proof that the school system in America should rightly be called 'the public indoctrination system'.

...this country is in big trouble and i for one am grateful i still have my guns because these libtard fools feel no qualms, no conflict in forcing everyone to toe the line if they can or else.

...they preach tolerance from the highest rooftop while being as intolerant of others as those jihadi fucks, ...it's a shame they aren't willing to blow themselves up to make their points.

...anyway, kudo's again to you and the good Dr Kynes for YOUR very obvious tolerance, i don't know how you manage it.

peace, bozo

 

[burgertime2010]

amazing, you spat all that crap out, yet still have not provided the mystical secret sutras which granted you the wisdom to declare Guns R Bad mmm'kay.

your Impassioned Pleas and terror at the idea your neighbors might have arms is not rational, nor is it a compelling reason for me to surrender my guns, which have never killed anyone except possibly my Enfeild. having been issued during the indian uprisings, and WW2, as well as the pakistan partition, it MAY have discharged a round on target, but even so, it's not the gun's fault, it had a job to do.

you unleash ad hominems against EVERYONE who doesnt wish to sacrifice the second amendment, based upon your abuse of the first, and yet you fail to realize your own much prized first amendment rights are ALSO "240 year old beliefs" from the EXACT SAME DOCUMENT that you declared "Obsolete".

and actually yes, you are a crybaby.

support your claims with EVIDENCE or accept that it's just your opinion, and has no more wieght that my opinion that all lefties should be forced to wear a mark or badge on their clothing so they can be quickly identified, and their views summarily dismissed.

I am not a "guns are bad" mind, you would know that if you read my posts. I accept it as my opinion and this is the place where opinions, history, and facts meet up from all different paradigms. I like that. You know, what you are doing by picking apart my opinions however crazy you find them to be still shows that you have not made any of your own thoughts outside the box. It is far easier to pick through and negate than solve creatively. Obsolete means a revision is necessary to include more modern weapons and the complexity of it all. Your insults are only making you seem petty, if you want to talk I am game. Do you want to call a truce? no more jabs. Just respect. I don't care to hear anymore otherwise.

 

[burgertime2010]

OK. Thank you. I had to break it into paragraphs to read it, but that is just my les-dixia or whatever it is called.

I have similar issues as dyslexics and apologize if my punctuation and structure is off....FYI. I am trying hard.

 

[Doer]

Oh right. Dyslexia. Structure was fine, I didn't mean that. Big blocks of text sort of swim around for me...other problems included.

Hopefully you get what I am saying. I am not trying to argue or sway anyone, just the facts as I see them, are brought forward, based on my experience.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Dear America,
Stop pretending you have anything inalienable, 240 year-old legal ideas are obsolete, your gun has nothing to do with freedom and will not protect you, a tyrannical government will have tanks, nothing you do is Christ-like....win elections without him. Everybody is lying to you. Wake up, nevermind, go back to sleep.

You're right. We should totally do away with the first ten amendments. Freedom of speech, don't need it. It's a 240 year old obsolete legal idea.

I don't like to call people names, but you are really close...

 

[burgertime2010]

OK. Thank you. I had to break it into paragraphs to read it, but that is just my les-dixia or whatever it is called. And you are thinking not trolling, so let us go from that. We can go thru it in order of what I bolded above.

- 1, please reference what you mean here and help me understand why that is relevant to you. Where did you get that, etc?

- 2, said before, you have the cart first, horse last. what drives this madness is the very real Anti-Con forces.

- 3, said before, 10,000 murders, is only about 1/2 of all murders per year. People kill. Countries with no guns use blades for mass murder and usually kill more at once.

- 4, DC vs Heller is the law of land. The 2nd is not about hunting it is about killing men, with modern battle rifles.

- 5, in Heller, SCOTUS reaffirmed the definition of Arms (btw, "should" is not what we are discussing in the reality of this)

- 6, never was flawless. the C was immediately Amended and is still being done so.

- 7, said before, this is not about revolt. Like "hunting" and "why do you need a bigger Mag?" Just red herring besides the point. CIVIL UNREST AND GUARDING LIFE, LIMB and PROPERTY

- 8, the change you call it, has beget the gun nut culture as a backlash. Good job. These changes, the gun control stupidity is over in many states.

It is swinging back, self protection is back against the civil unrest at your door. All the Stats show you are on the wrong side of this having been tampered, emotionally. You can rise above it. And you never have to own a gun.

But, evil visits at night and in the day.

So, I am brief this time, as I have said this all before. Face facts. Less confusion.

FYI but If my writing is poorly punctuated, difficult to decipher I have issues similar to dyslexics. I apologize.
I see you as steadfast in beliefs many of which I cannot confirm. I address Gun Nuts in theory. The evolution of such a culture you cannot dismiss conservatives....it seems like a blanket easy out to blame liberals. The running theme is that we are both wrong and right. I hear arguments made about revolt, and many of the things I address here by conservatives. Can I just suppose that the right to bear arms when written was inalienable? I will get back to you, I am not as stubborn as I may appear. My response is imaginative and that is all I meant it to be. I want some answers.......what makes me suspect is the company you keep...no offense.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Interesting spin on it, your opinions are good at looking true. I still think 300,000 people have died since guns were used by civilians to restore order here at home. Gun-nuts are the bastard children of a very violent American history and a good amount of irrational fear and racial tension. But the gun nuts are before anything simply consumers. Guns were cleverly put in the hands of all heroes on the silver screen cops, cowboys, war movies almost always had minority antagonists. Brilliant marketing and a scared population can produce any fanatic, not to mention guns are pretty exhilarating and release adrenaline when shot. The power and addiction one experiences is significant but they are here and now. The war between and armed populous and its' government in modern times is not going to restore the power grid, or our civilian communication networks. The strategy for the govt is not residential sweeps, it's no Call of Duty landscape, I speculate that if deprived of power, internet, water, and fresh food people become tyrannical against one and other. That high powered civilian arsenal is effective how in this situation? It seems a little hard to wrap my head around the right still as relevant as it once was. Please, I am trying to understand not take anything, I want to hear this tale play out the way you see it. I notice that gun-related homicide are a non issue for most gun people and wonder why that is? The darker side of widespread civilian ownership of powerful guns, ones that could fight in war, is worth acknowledging. A lot more dead people caught in the spray and ricochet and we owe them a good plausible reason. The Right to Bear Arms ends where? What point do we distinguish what arms anyone has the right to have? Which are both safe to the general public and highly destructive as needed in war. Bombs? Chemicals? Biological Arms should be our inalienable right. The Bill of Rights is not able to address this and these are alienable arms. Is this document still flawless, it leaves a lot of ambiguity and shows the illusion of its' basic tenet. Again, there are a lot of unanswered questions for people like me. There are delusions of how a modern revolt would be fought. I ask that those with opinions, facts, or additional perspective keep this clean exchange, we all need a break and let's talk. What is realistic, what is not, where do the changes need to happen......again please be respectful.

read Ivanhoe, the Mabignion, the bible, the koran, the torah, the Illiad, the Odyssey, The Epic of Gilgamesh, etc etc etc. heroes are almost always men with weapons, even when such weapons are limited to the ruling class, or in the hands of demigods, or motherfucking Achilles.

was Shakespeare a Madison Avenue Spin Spin Doctor?
was Homer part of the "Grand Plot" to convince us that those who wield weapons are to be emulated solely to convince little boys to play Myrmidons and Trojans, and sell more units of swords and shields??

you are too high to make such judgements.

 

[burgertime2010]

You're right. We should totally do away with the first ten amendments. Freedom of speech, don't need it. It's a 240 year old obsolete legal idea.

I don't like to call people names, but you are really close...

Tell me why I am wrong...obsolete means updated. Use your freedom of speech. No offense, but read my words slower and calmer. You make subjects I mentioned into statements you crafted.......be fair at least.

 

[burgertime2010]

read Ivanhoe, the Mabignion, the bible, the koran, the torah, the Illiad, the Odyssey, The Epic of Gilgamesh, etc etc etc. heroes are almost always men with weapons, even when such weapons are limited to the ruling class, or in the hands of demigods, or motherfucking Achilles.

was Shakespeare a Madison Avenue Spin Spin Doctor?
was Homer part of the "Grand Plot" to convince us that those who wield weapons are to be emulated solely to convince little boys to play Myrmidons and Trojans, and sell more units of swords and shields??

you are too high to make such judgements.

I try, I asked, I took an unpopular view but it does not matter. You know nothing about me. I regret the idea that we could speak courteously.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Tell me why I am wrong...obsolete means updated. Use your freedom of speech. No offense, but read my words slower and calmer. You make subjects I mentioned into statements you crafted.......be fair at least.

Obsolete does not mean "Updated", it means old, expired, no longer relevant, ready for the bin, spent, now useless, worn out, in need of demolishing, condemned.

 

[burgertime2010]

This is so wrong and sad. Havent you seen the movie 300, heard the story david and goliath, every enemy has a weakness, you just have to be cunning enough to figure out what it is. Tanks are not impenetrable. my guns will protect me from those driving the tank. Then i get a tank. We don't have legal ideas here, we have laws. Unless specifically designed to, laws do not expire, the constitution does not expire. I'm not sure you understand how our system is supposed to work.
Your correct that everyone is lying to me, its sales and propaganda. Read a book on U.S. law and the constitution.

I apologize in that my assumptions, beliefs, and ethics make you feel sad. I am sad too.....I miss somebody with balls to speak about their solutions, or ANY original ideas, vultures picking through pages to have something to hate.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I try, I asked, I took an unpopular view but it does not matter. You know nothing about me. I regret the idea that we could speak courteously.

you defenestrated with your first post in this thread:

If people are to blame why do we give them rights they cannot handle?

thus implying, rather directly, that anyone who owns firearms is irresponsible

then you then you went down to the street and kicked courtesy's mangled body with your second post:

Mathematics and statistics do not bode well for the adamant gun owner. He is afforded that right however and the questions remain as important as ever considering all the BS I have heard and all the shit on the other end. Saying people kill people is just lazy, the factors are endless.

checked to make sure courtesy was good and dead with your third:

You rarely see a list of Why to own a Firearm?

Pissed on the corpse with your fourth:

I am a total commie lib-tard but people are fucking morons. They don't deserve to participate in a lot of what corporate democracy allows them. They are not smart enough to use firearms safely, to eat healthily, to educate themselves, to vote, to think about any of this beyond "freedom." I am sorry but some of these things affect my freedom without my consent. I am not anti-gun, but there are a lot of different guns, bullets, loopholes, and jackoffs who need way more than practical defense.

and then began making absurd statements disguised as questions, just to make sure courtesy didnt rise as a Nosferatu, and menace your dreams with the remaining posts.

when unabe to defend your assumptions you then began the mindless ad hominems against gun owners, rather than gun ownership, referred to Secret Grimoires of forbidden knowledge which you believe PROVES guns are bad, and decalred me, personally to be incapable of comprehending your arcane wisdom.

this is the same pattern you followed in your failed arguments against GMO's, repeated here as a Mad Lib, with "Guns" replacing "GMO's" in all the subject portions of your sentences.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Tell me why I am wrong...obsolete means updated. Use your freedom of speech. No offense, but read my words slower and calmer. You make subjects I mentioned into statements you crafted.......be fair at least.

You said the 2nd is obsolete.

Obsolete:

adj.
1. No longer in use: an obsolete word.
2. Outmoded in design, style, or construction: an obsolete locomotive.
3. Biology Vestigial or imperfectly developed, especially in comparison with other individuals or related species; not clearly marked or seen; indistinct. Used of an organ or other part of an animal or plant.

I used your words.

You are wrong because government exists. If it exists there will be tyranny. Whether from my own, or an outside government.

History tells us so. The founding fathers were incredibly intelligent. They knew the score.

History is also filled with weaker armies defeating stronger armies. If it happened in America, there will be troops that will not go along with Washington, D.C.

Our own history tells us so.

As for reading your words, I did. When you say a 240 year old inalienable(born with it, not given by government) right is obsolete, you are ignoring tyranny. I made the comment regarding speech because its number one(technically older), and its 240 years old too. But you're ok with that one. Not the very next one though. It is not outdated. It is not useless because you think it is. You haven't proven that one bit.

I don't own a gun. Am not in the NRA. I don't subscribe to guns and ammo. I have shot a gun twice in my 36 years. And I know tyranny exists and that it can come to my neighborhood. Or yours.

Now I know that sounds paranoid to an extent, so let me be clear: while I don't think it's going to happen, it absolutely could. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I apologize in that my assumptions, beliefs, and ethics make you feel sad. I am sad too.....I miss somebody with balls to speak about their solutions, or ANY original ideas, vultures picking through pages to have something to hate.

and yety you treat SOLUTIONS like, following the constitution as absurd defenses of evil, made by fools who lack your Forbidden Wisdom, gleaned through many hours of study in the arcane libraries deep in the bowels of the catacombs under (i assume) UC Berkely.

 

[burgertime2010]

Right, poor choice of words on my part. Parts are obsolete to me but not the whole. Do you have anything else to add? Sorry, you are just boring and rude. Work on those aspects and talk to me.

 

[burgertime2010]

You said the 2nd is obsolete.

Obsolete:

adj.
1. No longer in use: an obsolete word.
2. Outmoded in design, style, or construction: an obsolete locomotive.
3. Biology Vestigial or imperfectly developed, especially in comparison with other individuals or related species; not clearly marked or seen; indistinct. Used of an organ or other part of an animal or plant.

I used your words.

You are wrong because government exists. If it exists there will be tyranny. Whether from my own, or an outside government.

History tells us so. The founding fathers were incredibly intelligent. They knew the score.

History is also filled with weaker armies defeating stronger armies. If it happened in America, there will be troops that will not go along with Washington, D.C.

Our own history tells us so.

As for reading your words, I did. When you say a 240 year old inalienable(born with it, not given by government) right is obsolete, you are ignoring tyranny. I made the comment regarding speech because its number one(technically older), and its 240 years old too. But you're ok with that one. Not the very next one though. It is not outdated. It is not useless because you think it is. You haven't proven that one bit.

I don't own a gun. Am not in the NRA. I don't subscribe to guns and ammo. I have shot a gun twice in my 36 years. And I know tyranny exists and that it can come to my neighborhood. Or yours.

Now I know that sounds paranoid to an extent, so let me be clear: while I don't think it's going to happen, it absolutely could. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

I am a relative of several of the founders and they drafted a document that was brilliant, revised rather than obsolete I meant. Sorry for the confusion. You should call me a name.

 

[burgertime2010]

and yety you treat SOLUTIONS like, following the constitution as absurd defenses of evil, made by fools who lack your Forbidden Wisdom, gleaned through many hours of study in the arcane libraries deep in the bowels of the catacombs under (i assume) UC Berkely.

You have an uncanny gift for assumptions that are dead wrong. I appreciate your input.....I am wiser now.

 

[Dr Kynes]

You have an uncanny gift for assumptions that are dead wrong. I appreciate your input.....I am wiser now.

the key is to ensure that your assumptions and opinions are marked as such, and assertions which you allege to be factual should have accompanying evidentiary links.

That is how debates work.

you can state "I Feel guns R bad Mm'kay" or, "I Believe Guns R bad Mmm'kay" or even "In my Opinion guns R bad Mmm'Kay", but the assertion that "Guns R bad Mmm'Kay" is a statement of opinion disguised as fact.

referring to Sacred Manuscripts (still Un-Named and Un-Linked) which reveal the Secret Wisdom which allows you to Opine that "Guns R bad Mmm'Kay, and Gun Owners are stupid and evil and careless and not to be trusted Mmmm'Kaaaaayyy" is a pathetic dodge, and an Appeal to (imaginary) Authority, as well as a Special Pleading, both are rhetorical fallacies which do not belong in any debate.

 

[Doer]

FYI but If my writing is poorly punctuated, difficult to decipher I have issues similar to dyslexics. I apologize.
I see you as steadfast in beliefs many of which I cannot confirm. I address Gun Nuts in theory. The evolution of such a culture you cannot dismiss conservatives....it seems like a blanket easy out to blame liberals. The running theme is that we are both wrong and right. I hear arguments made about revolt, and many of the things I address here by conservatives. Can I just suppose that the right to bear arms when written was inalienable? I will get back to you, I am not as stubborn as I may appear. My response is imaginative and that is all I meant it to be. I want some answers.......what makes me suspect is the company you keep...no offense.

Dude, I am a low function PSTD. I keep no company and that is the truth. It is the common symptom with the least understanding.....none.

But, that nonsense aside, you see me taking no sides here on RIU.

1) exact reality there, more specifically, no right, no wrong, in that sense. Flawless or flauntingly flawed, IS simply IS, and exists only NOW.

2) Yes, inalienable, until Amended.

So, rise above the false side taking of Politics. There has been no push of guns by Conservatives. More lies. Iinsidious regulations about the gun shows and transfers and all of the STUPIDITY of knee jerk libertards started this. We could see they are actually and factually attempting to stifle and socially marginalize gun ownership. Well, the NRA stepped up. Send them another $100.

That began the backlash caused by Liberals, infesting States, infesting Congress. It is prolong by Counties stacking Liars on their governance and voting in the stupid, with only book theory and no common sense.

What is not realized, is 50 States can become 60 practically overnight. It is already happening. The Conservative Counties can Op Out.

East Maryland, North Florida. South Oregon counties want to join North CA. North Colorado, is another and Texas by Treaty can be 4 States at anytime.

Liberals started a bunch of shit with this. Laws are going the other way. Texas, FL open carry. You don't know what you are messing with, but the Libs own this one.

I don't blame. That is silly. That is only the label, for the liars, that won't admit what they did here. They caused this. And Obama linked to to Religion. I do wonder who's side he is on. I love that. Gun sales through the roof, especically with women. My Doctor friend, Mr. Liberal, Lt.Cmd, Navy, Dis. had never even thought about it. Rejected it, really, all his life. Ducked out of M-16 quals.....in the OR.

Now he has 3 Glocks, Concealed Carry Permit, 1000 rounds, range work every week. He saw what the real Numb-nut cowards were doing. Attempting to control A RIGHT by smary, emotion tamper and LIES.

Take the guns, grrrrr. He is still a Democrat. He still never votes. He loves America.

The liberals impassioned a bunch of people that really didn't care, before, like me. Good job. Own it.

 

[beans davis]

Gun control is not about guns it's about control!

1.Australia gun control cost the gov. 500 mil and crime is up 44-300%

2. 1911-Turkey established gun control.From 1915-1917, 1.5 mil armenians,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

3.1929-The USSR established gun control.From 1929-1953 about 20 mil dissidents,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

4.1938-Germany established gun control.From 1939--1945 13 mil jews and others,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

5.1935-China established gun control.From 1948-1952,20 mil political dissidents,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

6.1964-Guatemala established gun control.From 1964-1981,100,00 mayan Indians,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

7.1970-Uganda established gun control.From1971-1979 300,000 Christians,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

8.1956-Cambodia established gun control.From 1971-1977,1 mil people,unable to defend themselves,were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th century b/c of gun control is 56 mil.

NEXT TIME SOMEBODY TALKS TO YOU ABOUT GUN CONTROL ASK THEM "WHO DO YOU WANT TO ROUND UP AND EXTERMINATE?"

WITH GUNS,WE ARE CITIZENS.WITHOUT THEM WE ARE SUBJECTS!