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 03-09-2018, 05:27 AM
 
36,470 posts, read 15,977,952 times
Reputation: 8282

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icy Tea View Post
I saw a very funny political cartoon on the 2nd Amendment and Gun owners rights today. A mule( democrat party) is wearing a " I support The Second Amendment" t shirt and he's talking to a man who is also wearing a " I support the 2nd Amendment " t shirt. The donkey says to the man" I support the 2nd amendment too, we're not taking your rights away."
The difference is, the mule has a t shirt with a musket and powder horn emblem and the man has a t shirt with an AR 15 emblem.
Instead of the musket he should have had a picture of "the semi-automatic Girardon which had a 22-shot capacity, were magazine-fed, and nearly silent--in other words a textbook "assault rifle" by many gun-control enthusiasts. The .46 caliber-repeating rifle"

"
Many gun owners have heard anti-gun activists say if the founding fathers knew of the military style assault weapons the country would be using in the future; they would have included those into the 2nd Amendment. As Jefferson's purchase demonstrates, clearly, they knew about the progress the gun world was making and specifically did not exclude certain weapons because they knew what the future of guns would hold. "

https://www.truthrevolt.org/news/tho...ult-rifle-1870

invented by Tyrollean Bartholomaus Girandoni around 1779
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:31 AM
 
536 posts, read 191,931 times
Reputation: 541
Default Why aren't the arguments used to defend guns ever used to defend alcohol and cigarettes?

People often say, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." However, I never hear anyone say, "Alcohol doesn't drive drunk, people drive drunk," nor do I ever hear people say, "Cigarettes don't produce second-hand smoke, people produce second-hand smoke." Why is this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:32 AM
 
36,470 posts, read 15,977,952 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manterro View Post
I agree with you and the truth is that guns are necessary in America. Not everyone needs them, of course. But if you work at night in a liquor store, carry a cash payroll, operate a high volume business, live in an inner city, live far from town or are in one of a million other situations, you need a gun in America. Most of the people who own them, need them. They haven’t taken money out of their pockets and spent them on a lump of iron because they are crazy. They have done so because in their violent society, guns are often necessary.
"
Homeowner held burglary suspect at gunpoint

Armed Citizen: Homeowner held burglary suspect at gunpoint

https://www.discoverferndale.com/nei...unpoint_74295/

Over 560 PAGES of REAL stories that you will NOT see on national TV or read about in the LA Times, Wash Post, Balt. Sun etc.

And we KNOW WHY!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:40 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
11,402 posts, read 3,894,518 times
Reputation: 7065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maccabee 2A View Post
Actually statistically speaking, the EU has more mass shootings than we do.
This is according to largely dscredited Fox News columist John R Lott, who is ofteb decribed as the Gun Lobbies Guru. Lott even the supposedly independent 'Crime Prevention Research Centre'
which he just happens to be President of.

Lott has been accused of being creatrive when it comes to actual figures with a lot of US Shootings not counted, and an emphasis on comparing Europe in relation to a few years when there were terrorist attacks such as the Paris Shooting or Norway massacre.

When actually confronted with the truth he usually tries to change the subject and continually cite further dubious statistics.

The bogus claims of the NRA's favorite social scientist, debunked - Vox

Shooting Down the Gun Lobby's Favorite “Academic”: A Lott of Lies

The GOP's favorite gun 'academic' is a fraud – ThinkProgress

Who Is Behind the Lie That More Guns Makes Us Safe? | The Nation

Trump, Guns, and Lies, Incorporated - The American Prospect


Last edited by Brave New World; 03-09-2018 at 05:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:41 AM
 
23,862 posts, read 11,851,588 times
Reputation: 10068
People kill people when driving drunk.

Second hand smoke from idiots who smoke can over time kill people.

So it’s peoples actions that kill people not the substance or instrument.

Happy?

So when can I sue Chevrolet for hitting me?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:45 AM
 
36,470 posts, read 15,977,952 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
So instead of addressing our gun problem the best solution is to harden all our schools? Florida’s solution is misguided, raise the age to 21, 3 day waiting period, $400B on schools. This does not come close to addressing the issue.

No there does not need to be a constitutional amendment to ban semi auto weapons just some courage.
"raise the age to 21,"

ONLY for people who live in urban areas, where you must live.

"3 day waiting period"

Women have been KILLED "waiting" to get their gun.

"$400B on schools"

I don't know where you got that number but, it is immaterial.

We have heard over and over from the left, "If it saves just ONE child, it IS worth kit" on silly bills they have wanted to pass.

Most school admin dept are WAY over employed.

In my old state when a principle was near retirement he was transfused to the Dept of Ed admin office.

As with most government entities there is a LOT of waste fraud and abuse of money.

Many school s give teachers a raise just because thy got a Master's degree and have NOT PROVEN they can teach better.

If you REALLY think kids are worth it, the money CAN be found.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:48 AM
 
3,871 posts, read 1,899,272 times
Reputation: 5374
Cigarette and alcohol possession aren't protected by the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:49 AM
 
6,971 posts, read 2,582,352 times
Reputation: 2760
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguitar77111 View Post
People often say, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." However, I never hear anyone say, "Alcohol doesn't drive drunk, people drive drunk," nor do I ever hear people say, "Cigarettes don't produce second-hand smoke, people produce second-hand smoke." Why is this?
Why do I seem to remember something about a lawsuit or two against the tobacco industry?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 05:55 AM
 
36,470 posts, read 15,977,952 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
10,000 people a year murdered by guns, how many killed by fertilizer.
"10,000 people a year murdered by guns,"

I have NEVER seen a gun jump up murder anyone. Have YOU?

It is NOT the instrument, it IS the person using it.

Do you have ANY idea about the details of those, 10,000?

I DOUBT it.

With the very HIGH murder rates in places like Chicago, Balt, etc., why don't your kind go after them, considering THAT is WHERE MOST murders occur?

So, the REAL question is, do you CARE about people being killed OR just against guns in general?

Why do you NOT put your attention on the few cities where MOST of these murders, INCLUDING INNOCENT KIDS, occur?

I have ASKED THIS MANY TIMES ON THIS SITE AND SELDOM, IF EVER, GET A REPLY FOR GUN GRABBERS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2018, 06:12 AM
 
36,470 posts, read 15,977,952 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
The question of assault weapon restrictions or bans (semi auto or what ever is finally defined in law) has never been adequately framed. That is the point of the NRA's constant barrage and brain washing efforts...to keep the question and issue from being defined in an actionable way. Gun advocates are scared witless by the unfounded claims and rhetoric of the NRA. The gun opponents are in the majority but have never been able to come together on a strategy. Some want a complete repeal of the 2nd amendment. Some want a just a ban on assault rifles and nothing more. Some of those folks are gun owners and hunters and have a rational opposing position on assault weapons. Some folks want tighter controls on sale and possession and a ban on gun show sales or private sales. The confusion of strategies is not helpful but if the opposition ever gets its act together it will steamroll the gun lobby and the NRA...and they know it. The recent Florida school shooting has moved things further than previous events and the frightened NRA is calling in favors and increasing the volume of its foolish claims on mental health, free-lance gun-toting heroes, and imagined bad guys in the bushes. Thanks to the NRA, the killing goes on.
"Some want a just a ban on assault rifles and nothing more."

This is ONE of the problems.

There is really no such thing as an "assault rifle".

Designation of firearms relies with the U.S. military has wade in:

"
3. The origin of the term assault rifle”comes from the German word “sturmgewehr”after the Sturmgewehr 44 German Army rifle from the Second World War. The rifle was a compact, selective fire weapon in an intermediate caliber cartridge.
Since 1944, military firearms that fit this general description and general design have sometimes been labeled as an“assault rifle. Some civilian versions of military look-alike rifle have been erroneously labeled as“assault rifles” because they generally fit the description, however, since the civilian rifles have been modified internally to eliminate the selective fire capability, they are not“assault rifles”.

The United States Army does not designate any of it's infantry arms with the term "assault rifle" The United States Army does not designate any of it’s infantry small arms with the term“assault rifle"


(Reprinted from Gun Week, October 1, 1997)
The Second Amendment
http://www.tulprpc.org/attachments/F...ault_Rifle.pdf

To call any AR 15 type rifle an "assault weapon or rifle" is a flat out lie.


Several sate have come up with their OWN meanings.
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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:00 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top