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.
None have chosen trucks instead of guns in the past two years of mass shootings. Gee, I wonder why.
Because people can see trucks far easier than they can see bullets. Once high capacity magazines and bump stocks are banned on a federal basis, maybe they will switch to trucks. That said a guy's objective is to kill, truck's isn't.
[quote=katharsis;56080151]^^ You are wrong about the attitudes of most Americans being against immigration. Most Americans think that immigration makes out country better.
From the link below
Quote:
: "Quinnipiac University released another poll, on January 29, in which the response to the question of whether immigration was good or bad for the country was slightly more positive. Three-quarters (75 percent) of voters overall said immigration was good for the country, including 60 percent of Republicans, 90 percent of Democrats, and 79 percent of independents."
I'll play along with you for a second and agree (though I disagree that most Americans want continued immigration - though I'm guessing they mean LEGAL immigration), birthright citizenship was NOT intended.
Quote:
The amendment specifies that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” If the framers simply intended to make citizens of any person born in U.S. territory, then that central clause has no purpose.
But they didn’t, and it does. It’s there to clarify that simply being born here is not enough.
So with that in mind...how many people here are NOT supposed to be voting and making decisions on Americans' behalf?? 30 million...50 million...more?
And Cho and Mateen (among many others) should NOT have even been here. And therefore, the dead from their shootings are dead because of politicians allowing it to happen...the blood is on their hands.
I also don't believe as it is written that birthright citizenship was ever intended.
Probably not.
Nonetheless, it has been accepted all along.
Immigrants have been getting busy creating children all along. It gave them a leg up on their own citizenship and that of offspring born elsewhere. Then the chain migration thing followed.
Immigrants have been getting busy creating children all along. It gave them a leg up on their own citizenship and that of offspring born elsewhere. Then the chain migration thing followed.
Yes, not for the better. And many dead Americans at the hands of Cho and Mateen because of it.
The FACT is that laws don't keep things out of the handscof people willing to break the law to get them.
Just as any criminal who wants to buy heroine buys heroine, any criminal who wants to buy a banned rifle will buy a banned rifle.
There is no perfect law, why is that the argument when it comes to guns. Laws do in fact prevent people from acquiring guns. But some states are such minimal regulation it is far too easy.
There is no perfect law, why is that the argument when it comes to guns. Laws do in fact prevent people from acquiring guns.
Yes they do, they even prevented this guy from getting a gun.....where did he get it? How could he get it? Did he break current laws to get a gun? How can that be? I mean he was supposed to follow laws, right, so more laws will help?
Quote:
The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms confirmed that he failed a background check but didn’t offer more details. “The background check was run through NICS,” said ATF Assistant Special Agent in Charge John Wester, referring to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. “He did try to get a gun and was denied a gun.”
"Oh Jim, looks like mkpunk threw the challenge flag onto the field."
"Yes Mike, mkpunk disagrees with the play and thinks that triggering happens to the right. I hear our specialist John has his view."
"Jim if we look at how many complain about AOC, Bernie, The Squad, gun laws, socialized healthcare, he is right. There are tons of conservatives and Trump supporters who are triggered. This should be an easy reversal in mkpunk's favor."
"Thanks John."
"Looks like our referee unit is ready with his decision Mike."
"That was fast Jim."
"The ruling on the field is reversed. Triggering is for conservatives and liberals. ClemVegas is wrong."
If expressing an opinion or disagreeing with liberals is the meaning of triggered, then yes, I and other conservatives are triggered.
I don't think you gonna find conservatives on college campuses trying to censor speech like many of the liberal students do. That's where the triggering thing originated.
liberal students would literally say they were triggered by something and try to get censorship and safe zones.
Yes they do, they even prevented this guy from getting a gun.....where did he get it? How could he get it? Did he break current laws to get a gun? How can that be? I mean he was supposed to follow laws, right, so more laws will help?
Yeah, it was either a really old gun, or he stole it, or maybe it was a family member's, or he got it off the street (illegally). These bad guys always seem to manage to get guns.
Yes they do, they even prevented this guy from getting a gun.....where did he get it? How could he get it? Did he break current laws to get a gun? How can that be? I mean he was supposed to follow laws, right, so more laws will help?
Plenty of ways to get a gun through the internet or a relative or friend, we will see where this leads but we shouldn’t make it easier by relaxing laws. Pointing to some incidents to make claims that gun laws don’t work as a reason for less restrictions isn’t the answer.
Last edited by Goodnight; 09-02-2019 at 05:58 PM..
Plenty of ways to get a gun through the internet or a relative or friend, we will see where this leads but we shouldn’t make it easier by relaxing laws.
So, how do we close everything, while keeping the law abiding clear?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Pointing to some incidents to make claims that gun laws don’t work as a reason for less restrictions isn’t the answer.
That's what you and your ilk do all the time. Point to one incident and claim we need more guns laws.
Lets say 1000 people are killed by guns yearly....
1000/35000 = 0.0285714285714286 chances of being killed in a mass shooting.
What about the 11 children killed in drive by shootings in St. Louis in 3 months? Again, fix that and your shootings go down....but once again, you don't care about those shootings....they are single killings....
So sad on you and your ilks part.....
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.
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.
