LET'S BAN GUNS!

[K@th]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... ea05758844

Written by an anti-gun lady, published in the Washington Post.
(Lest you suspect NRA fingerprints are on it)

Thank you. That's exactly the type of thing I'm looking for.

[Montegriffo]

I just don't understand why people bring up automobile fatalities when it comes to gun regulation, unless they are recommending a federal regulatory and licensing apparatus with reach into every state's gun laws.

It is either that, an intentional red herring, or a lack of understanding.

Classic distraction tactics. Same with the fast food tangent we were supposed to go down.
Also talk of being to early to discuss gun control arguments is a disingenuous tactic. After a terrorist attack there is no period of mourning before the attacks on all Muslims start.
The gun control argument is ongoing, of course it is going to intensify after another mass shooting.

[K@th]

Check

Check

and Check

So, you already have everything you want.

What the fuck are you on about?

I'm sorry my question was too difficult for you to understand.

[PartyOf5]

My point was the idiocy in a user writing a post about how they know criminals will murder anyway, but admitting they're finally on board with disarming the elderly, disabled, oppressed, and sportsmen, because Steven Colbert said more words.

Where did I mention disarming? I never did. Take your maniacal ranting and stuff it for a moment so you can at least comprehend what it was I wrote.

There is a lot of ground between yee-haw gun free-for-all and disarming. Stop screaming at everyone who isn't in the free-for-all camp like they mean to take away every gun, down to the last BB.

We don't live in a yee-haw gun free-for-all, you nit.

You're going in the know-nothing lefty gun grabber column until you demonstrate that you know fuck-all about what you're speaking on.

Chicago has the highest gun crime rate in the nation, and has the most strict gun laws in the nation. If you can't recognize what that means, you're hopeless.

I know we don't live in yee-haw gun free-for-all, but it's what some in this country want. It's a stance some have taken, not here in this forum, but those people are out there. It's the far right to the ban all guns far left, which we also do not live in, but have people who would live that. Before you call me a nit, read what I wrote.

[The Conservative]

Where did I mention disarming? I never did. Take your maniacal ranting and stuff it for a moment so you can at least comprehend what it was I wrote.

There is a lot of ground between yee-haw gun free-for-all and disarming. Stop screaming at everyone who isn't in the free-for-all camp like they mean to take away every gun, down to the last BB.

We don't live in a yee-haw gun free-for-all, you nit.

You're going in the know-nothing lefty gun grabber column until you demonstrate that you know fuck-all about what you're speaking on.

Chicago has the highest gun crime rate in the nation, and has the most strict gun laws in the nation. If you can't recognize what that means, you're hopeless.

I know we don't live in yee-haw gun free-for-all, but it's what some in this country want. It's a stance some have taken, not here in this forum, but those people are out there. It's the far right to the ban all guns far left, which we also do not live in, but have people who would live that. Before you call me a nit, read what I wrote.

You are a nit.

[PartyOf5]

You are a nit.

So brave!

[The Conservative]

You are a nit.

So brave!

You said read what you said before saying you are a nit. I did...

You are a nit.

[PartyOf5]

You are a nit.

So brave!

You said read what you said before saying you are a nit. I did...

You are a nit.

Even braver!

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I just don't understand why people bring up automobile fatalities when it comes to gun regulation, unless they are recommending a federal regulatory and licensing apparatus with reach into every state's gun laws.

It is either that, an intentional red herring, or a lack of understanding.

Because next to knives they are the only other thing in the US that people own more than one of, statistically that can be considered a weapon by even liberal thought processes.

'Statistically considered a weapon' is a phrase that I am having trouble with.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I just don't understand why people bring up automobile fatalities when it comes to gun regulation, unless they are recommending a federal regulatory and licensing apparatus with reach into every state's gun laws.

It is either that, an intentional red herring, or a lack of understanding.

Classic distraction tactics. Same with the fast food tangent we were supposed to go down.
Also talk of being to early to discuss gun control arguments is a disingenuous tactic. After a terrorist attack there is no period of mourning before the attacks on all Muslims start.
The gun control argument is ongoing, of course it is going to intensify after another mass shooting.

I think we should balance our budget with a massive sugar/corn syrup consumption tax, speaking of fast food.