Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-06-2015, 06:40 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,409 posts, read 26,384,343 times
Reputation: 15709

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
You didn't ask that question, you stated that AR style firearms should be banned. The three examples I posted operate exactly the same way the AR style ones do. Which one would you ban?




You want to ban certain ones because of cosmetics (a the second exemplar I posted can do much more damage in a shorter period of time than an AR style firearm).


Since we're banning things because of cosmetics I think the new Camaro should be banned. They're butt ugly.

There are several reasons why a gun should be banned, semi-auto, magazine capacity, firing rate, the issue is where you draw the line, not based on just one function.

Let's start with the AR-15, make your case why it should not be banned since that is rather popular in these mass shootings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-06-2015, 06:45 AM
 
12,265 posts, read 6,501,837 times
Reputation: 9442
The stupidity of the Times amazes me. They don`t know that the more guns we have the safer we are? That`s why we have the lowest homicide rate of all developed countries. Everyone knows that, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 06:53 AM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,600 posts, read 60,922,955 times
Reputation: 61293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
There are several reasons why a gun should be banned, semi-auto, magazine capacity, firing rate, the issue is where you draw the line, not based on just one function.

Let's start with the AR-15, make your case why it should not be banned since that is rather popular in these mass shootings.



Your criteria also cover the ones I posted. The firing rate of each of those matches that of an AR variant. They all fire more destructive rounds caliber wise (except for the second one, it's more properly called a gauge in that one), are more accurate and can be reloaded nearly as quickly.


I ask again, which one of those three would you ban?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 07:48 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
9,267 posts, read 5,141,570 times
Reputation: 8471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
There are several reasons why a gun should be banned, semi-auto, magazine capacity, firing rate, the issue is where you draw the line, not based on just one function.

Let's start with the AR-15, make your case why it should not be banned since that is rather popular in these mass shootings.
There are not several reasons why a gun should be banned. Your list of attributes is meaningless.
All mere specification highlights oft parroted by people like you.

The AR is a versatile platform that is very popular because it is easy to build and customize.
It's a lot of fun, but can get expensive when you build a collection. Ask my wife!

Finally, you should move on and take up gardening or jigsaw puzzles because you are failing miserably with your message.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,621,026 times
Reputation: 24780
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act under those same "false pretenses."

What are you not understanding about the word LIBERATION? The liberation of Iraq was Clinton's call, not Bush's. Why do liberals always try to rewrite history to exonerate the actions of Dems? /SMH


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE
So amusing how the Bush apologists twist themselves into pretzels trying to blame Clinton, Obama, Gore, their next door neighbor, or the kid down the street for their hero's idiotic invasion and disastrous aftermath.

Brilliant!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 09:30 AM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,827 posts, read 6,952,698 times
Reputation: 3416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss View Post
Those weapons take away from your freedom, as it is now easier to get shot then to win one of the Multi-State Lotteries.
From a gun owner.
Got any links, or is this more of your speculation? Actually if you remove some of the inner city violence, the odds against getting shot in this country is close to the numbers in any European nation which exercises gun control measures.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 09:33 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,366 posts, read 45,100,927 times
Reputation: 13813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
So amusing how the Bush apologists twist themselves into pretzels trying to blame Clinton, Obama, Gore, their next door neighbor, or the kid down the street for their hero's idiotic invasion and disastrous aftermath.
Liberating Iraq was Clinton's call, not Bush's. Facts are facts, even when you don't like them.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,621,026 times
Reputation: 24780
Talking So cute...

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Liberating Iraq was Clinton's call, not Bush's. Facts are facts, even when you don't like them.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE

Keep ignoring who invaded Iraq.

Keep on trying to blame everyone but "the decider."

Of course, he had help.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 01:12 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,366 posts, read 45,100,927 times
Reputation: 13813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Keep ignoring who invaded Iraq.
To do what... LIBERATE Iraq, which was Clinton's call.

Quote:
Keep on trying to blame everyone but "the decider."
Actually, Clinton decided.

History 101. Listen to what Clinton said. Our military was to be used to liberate Iraq:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2015, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,621,026 times
Reputation: 24780
Very amusing.

"Clinton, not Bush, invaded Iraq."

But at least, you've convinced yourself.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:03 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top