Blacksmith311 0 #676 October 11, 2017 3,000 people killed in a single incident done by verified foreign terrorism is not even in the same conversation as this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #677 October 11, 2017 How much domestic terrorism will it take to reach your desired threshold? More Americans have died by guns on American soil than all wars in history. I think that's too many. More so when a school is attacked and innocent children die via mass murder terrorism. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #678 October 11, 2017 Blacksmith311QuoteBIG differences: 1) no powerful organization is blocking research into the other causes of preventable death. 2) no powerful organization blocks every effort to remediate the other causes of preventable death. 3) people dying from medical error are not usually in peak health. They are already sick and maybe dying anyway. You mean Powerful organization set in place as a buffer to prevent over reaction by left leaning politicians. The NRA was not founded for that purpose. Your knowledge of history is pathetic. Quote I would love to see your data on number 3 as to the reason for the surgery, and the MALPRACTICE that killed them. Malpractice here, not a body that was too sick to survive the surgery. http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/09/health/medical-mistakes/index.html None of this mentions Old sick people who were about to die.. You brought up medical errors. So show us the data on the number of perfectly healthy individuals killed by malpractice, compared with the number killed by guns. I find your cavalier attitude to the deaths of innocent, healthy people appalling.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #679 October 11, 2017 Blacksmith3113,000 people killed in a single incident done by verified foreign terrorism is not even in the same conversation as this. Why do we have to pick one? I'd choose to try and save people from both types of death, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #680 October 11, 2017 >3,000 people killed in a single incident done by verified foreign terrorism is not even in the >same conversation as this. 3000 innocent Americans killed by evil murderers - a SUPER big deal! Shut down the skies! Form the TSA! Ban the Muslims! 9000 innocent Americans killed by evil murderers a year - No big deal. Who cares? It's insignificant. Why are we even talking about this? Most of the killers were Christians, and fellow gun owners, so it's OK. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 1,149 #681 October 11, 2017 Blacksmith311Even so how many of you have turned a blind eye to someone who you know had too many to drive and allowed them to leave in their own car? DWI killed more people in the US than Guns. In 2015, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html 33,636 deaths due to "injury by firearms"(2013) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States DUI deaths are usually not intentional events. Vr. gun use where a few hundred may be accidental. You should fact check. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #682 October 11, 2017 yoink***3,000 people killed in a single incident done by verified foreign terrorism is not even in the same conversation as this. Why do we have to pick one? We don't. It's a classic false dichotomy fallacy.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #683 October 11, 2017 normissHow much domestic terrorism will it take to reach your desired threshold? More Americans have died by guns on American soil than all wars in history. I think that's too many. More so when a school is attacked and innocent children die via mass murder terrorism. no law you can come up with will prevent another attack. Period."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nolhtairt 0 #684 October 11, 2017 Phil1111***Even so how many of you have turned a blind eye to someone who you know had too many to drive and allowed them to leave in their own car? DWI killed more people in the US than Guns. In 2015, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html 33,636 deaths due to "injury by firearms"(2013) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States DUI deaths are usually not intentional events. Vr. gun use where a few hundred may be accidental. You should fact check. How about total deaths from all vehicular accidents? I'm sure that number comes close or beats total deaths from firearms. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #685 October 11, 2017 Bill Von & Kallend; How would the ideas you have put forth (reverting to muskets only or 5-round magazine limit) affect your current gun ownership? Do you own any 6+ round magazines or any gun other than a musket? Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blacksmith311 0 #686 October 11, 2017 You got me there, don't live there, don't have an NRA Membership, but you have to agree that anyone who is supporting NRA today is getting it to support the NRA's current goal and that is to be a buffer from over reactive over reaching politicians and that was my point. Why are you bringing up why it was historically started? This is about today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #687 October 11, 2017 rushmc***How much domestic terrorism will it take to reach your desired threshold? More Americans have died by guns on American soil than all wars in history. I think that's too many. More so when a school is attacked and innocent children die via mass murder terrorism. no law you can come up with will prevent another attack. Period. Another STUPID argument from Marc. No vault can prevent another bank robbery, so stop using bank vaults or developing better ones. No vaccination can prevent another disease outbreak, so stop vaccinating or developing better vaccines. No restraints can prevent another road death, so stop using restraints or developing better ones. etc.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #688 October 11, 2017 Blacksmith311 Why are you bringing up why it was historically started? This is about today. Because YOU brought up the reason it was 'set in place'. Having memory issues?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blacksmith311 0 #689 October 11, 2017 At this age probabaly. Forgive me, what I should have said was the purpose of it in today's political world is in the defense of citizens vs knee jerk politicsQuote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #690 October 11, 2017 Sorry John. You fail again. That was Dianne Feinstein's argument. Say it to her."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hooknswoop 19 #691 October 11, 2017 QuoteNo vault can prevent another bank robbery, so stop using bank vaults or developing better ones. No, of course not. But let's not use a bank robbery to justify eliminating ATM's, installing TSA-type screening with manned security at the doors to banks, and requiring vaults to be so secure that you have to wait 24+ hours to get cash from them. Seems to me that bank vaults are secure enough and that they are at the point of diminishing returns for increasing their security. We accept that at their current level of security, there will be some bank robberies every year, but not enough to spend a lot of money and inconvenience to increase their level of security. Do you own any guns more modern that a musket? Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 801 #692 October 11, 2017 If I'm stopped by a cop and found with possession of $10,000 in cash, why is that different than being caught in possession of 10,000 guns? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hooknswoop 19 #693 October 11, 2017 QuoteIf I'm stopped by a cop and found with possession of $10,000 in cash, why is that different than being caught in possession of 10,000 guns? They aren't different? Both are legal? http://www.snopes.com/business/money/10000.asp Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,490 #694 October 11, 2017 Blacksmith311Why are you bringing up why it was historically started? Probably because that's how any normal english speaking person would have interpreted your initial statement. If you want to argue semantics, please start by being more precise in your choice of words.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 801 #695 October 11, 2017 You need to read a link you attempt to use to justify something, because it doesn't. If you had read all the way through that Snopes explanation, you would see this: However, if you are pulled over by a police officer with thousands of dollars in your vehicle, you may be asked to explain how and why you’re carrying so much money (ostensibly to uncover the trafficking of drugs and other contraband). And in many cases, law enforcement agents can seize large sums of cash and insist you provide proof you acquired the currency legally and do not intend to use it for illicit purposes. Legal justification for seizing money in that scenario is broad and complex, making it risky (even if not technically illegal) to transport large sums of cash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,490 #696 October 11, 2017 HooknswoopQuoteIf I'm stopped by a cop and found with possession of $10,000 in cash, why is that different than being caught in possession of 10,000 guns? They aren't different? Both are legal? http://www.snopes.com/business/money/10000.asp Doesn't stop it from being stolen by 'the man' though. With the burden of proof on you to get it back. Which, tbh, is a totally seperate issue. Fucked up, for sure! But unrelated.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hooknswoop 19 #697 October 11, 2017 QuoteHowever, if you are pulled over by a police officer with thousands of dollars in your vehicle, you may be asked to explain how and why you’re carrying so much money (ostensibly to uncover the trafficking of drugs and other contraband). And in many cases, law enforcement agents can seize large sums of cash and insist you provide proof you acquired the currency legally and do not intend to use it for illicit purposes. Legal justification for seizing money in that scenario is broad and complex, making it risky (even if not technically illegal) to transport large sums of cash. I kinda figured the same thing would happen if you were caught in possession of 10,000 guns. Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 801 #698 October 11, 2017 I was stopped for speeding on my way to a gun range years ago, LOADED car with weapons and ammo. When officer first approached, all paperwork including CWP, declared the weapons and the amounts, Mr Friendly White Officer just smiled and asked me not to reach for anything. After checking ID's via the system, "Have a nice day Mr Cochran, good luck at the range, and slow down a little!" I must have missed his calling for backup and shouts of "STOP RESISTING!". Oh wait...I'm white. Like the most successful mass shooters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,991 #699 October 11, 2017 >Seems to me that bank vaults are secure enough and that they are at the point >of diminishing returns for increasing their security. Bank vaults - agreed. However, if there were 30,000 successful vault robberies a year, and they all involved easy to get through bank vault doors, then it would be a given that vault doors were NOT secure enough. And you can bet that new laws would be passed overnight - because politicians would lose money too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hooknswoop 19 #700 October 11, 2017 QuoteI was stopped for speeding on my way to a gun range years ago, LOADED car with weapons and ammo. When officer first approached, all paperwork including CWP, declared the weapons and the amounts, Mr Friendly White Officer just smiled and asked me not to reach for anything. After checking ID's via the system, "Have a nice day Mr Cochran, good luck at the range, and slow down a little!" I must have missed his calling for backup and shouts of "STOP RESISTING!". Oh wait...I'm white. Like the most successful mass shooters. Did you have 10,000 guns? Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next Page 28 of 124 This topic is now closed to further replies. 2 2
rushmc 23 #690 October 11, 2017 Sorry John. You fail again. That was Dianne Feinstein's argument. Say it to her."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #691 October 11, 2017 QuoteNo vault can prevent another bank robbery, so stop using bank vaults or developing better ones. No, of course not. But let's not use a bank robbery to justify eliminating ATM's, installing TSA-type screening with manned security at the doors to banks, and requiring vaults to be so secure that you have to wait 24+ hours to get cash from them. Seems to me that bank vaults are secure enough and that they are at the point of diminishing returns for increasing their security. We accept that at their current level of security, there will be some bank robberies every year, but not enough to spend a lot of money and inconvenience to increase their level of security. Do you own any guns more modern that a musket? Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #692 October 11, 2017 If I'm stopped by a cop and found with possession of $10,000 in cash, why is that different than being caught in possession of 10,000 guns? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #693 October 11, 2017 QuoteIf I'm stopped by a cop and found with possession of $10,000 in cash, why is that different than being caught in possession of 10,000 guns? They aren't different? Both are legal? http://www.snopes.com/business/money/10000.asp Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,490 #694 October 11, 2017 Blacksmith311Why are you bringing up why it was historically started? Probably because that's how any normal english speaking person would have interpreted your initial statement. If you want to argue semantics, please start by being more precise in your choice of words.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #695 October 11, 2017 You need to read a link you attempt to use to justify something, because it doesn't. If you had read all the way through that Snopes explanation, you would see this: However, if you are pulled over by a police officer with thousands of dollars in your vehicle, you may be asked to explain how and why you’re carrying so much money (ostensibly to uncover the trafficking of drugs and other contraband). And in many cases, law enforcement agents can seize large sums of cash and insist you provide proof you acquired the currency legally and do not intend to use it for illicit purposes. Legal justification for seizing money in that scenario is broad and complex, making it risky (even if not technically illegal) to transport large sums of cash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,490 #696 October 11, 2017 HooknswoopQuoteIf I'm stopped by a cop and found with possession of $10,000 in cash, why is that different than being caught in possession of 10,000 guns? They aren't different? Both are legal? http://www.snopes.com/business/money/10000.asp Doesn't stop it from being stolen by 'the man' though. With the burden of proof on you to get it back. Which, tbh, is a totally seperate issue. Fucked up, for sure! But unrelated.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #697 October 11, 2017 QuoteHowever, if you are pulled over by a police officer with thousands of dollars in your vehicle, you may be asked to explain how and why you’re carrying so much money (ostensibly to uncover the trafficking of drugs and other contraband). And in many cases, law enforcement agents can seize large sums of cash and insist you provide proof you acquired the currency legally and do not intend to use it for illicit purposes. Legal justification for seizing money in that scenario is broad and complex, making it risky (even if not technically illegal) to transport large sums of cash. I kinda figured the same thing would happen if you were caught in possession of 10,000 guns. Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #698 October 11, 2017 I was stopped for speeding on my way to a gun range years ago, LOADED car with weapons and ammo. When officer first approached, all paperwork including CWP, declared the weapons and the amounts, Mr Friendly White Officer just smiled and asked me not to reach for anything. After checking ID's via the system, "Have a nice day Mr Cochran, good luck at the range, and slow down a little!" I must have missed his calling for backup and shouts of "STOP RESISTING!". Oh wait...I'm white. Like the most successful mass shooters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #699 October 11, 2017 >Seems to me that bank vaults are secure enough and that they are at the point >of diminishing returns for increasing their security. Bank vaults - agreed. However, if there were 30,000 successful vault robberies a year, and they all involved easy to get through bank vault doors, then it would be a given that vault doors were NOT secure enough. And you can bet that new laws would be passed overnight - because politicians would lose money too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #700 October 11, 2017 QuoteI was stopped for speeding on my way to a gun range years ago, LOADED car with weapons and ammo. When officer first approached, all paperwork including CWP, declared the weapons and the amounts, Mr Friendly White Officer just smiled and asked me not to reach for anything. After checking ID's via the system, "Have a nice day Mr Cochran, good luck at the range, and slow down a little!" I must have missed his calling for backup and shouts of "STOP RESISTING!". Oh wait...I'm white. Like the most successful mass shooters. Did you have 10,000 guns? Derek V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
