Cops: Woman Shot Dead at 'Blade Runner' Home

[sirs]

Alas, there is no law against stupidity, and its human nature that's the problem, not the particular tool some murderer or some insane person happens to use, be it a bat or a shotgun. 

There IS however also a right to bear arms in this country.  So, as passionate and sincere as you might be, reality is a far crueler critter....at least until you can invent something that can magically pre-determine who WILL act out irresponsibly.  Paging Minority Report

[BSB]

This happened in South Africa so it has nothing to do with your precious little 2nd amendment. Just like banning AR15s has nothing to do with your precious little 2nd amendment. Just like banning high capacity magazines has nothing to do with your precious little 2nd amendment. In fact most of what you bore us silly with has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.

Organized societies place controls on guns for a reason. Those who don't, like Afghanistan, Somalia, and disturbingly the United States, pay the price. Anyone with an IQ over 60 can figure that out.


BSB

[sirs]

This happened in South Africa so it has nothing to do with your precious little 2nd amendment.

Actually it has quite a bit to do with that precious thing called the constitution.  Banning a weapon that looks mean doesn't absolve the person intent on killing.  they can just as easy grab a shotgun or a bat.  Your fixation with the AR & magazines is indeed fascinating, while it does precious little to actually decrease violent crime or gun deaths. 

Organized societies place controls on guns for a reason. Those who don't, like Afghanistan, Somalia, and disturbingly the United States, pay the price. Anyone with an IQ over 60 can figure that out.

We're pretty organized ourselves.  Our founders were actually smart enough to put in place the mechanisms to amend the Constitution, if it's just so burdensome for some.  By all means, stop flapping the gums, take that 60+IQ, and do something about it, if the 2nd amendment is just that horrid

[BSB]

Frankly Sirs you aren't even remotely connected intellectually to the founding fathers. In fact you aren't even remotely related intellectually to the United States of America. You're just an internet blowhard with nothing to contribute to this forum let alone this country. You don't belong to a political party. You don't even belong to the NRA. You never took an oath to defend the constitution. What you say about our founding documents means absolutely nothing to me. In fact I'd be more interested in what some of our illegals have to say than you. It would be far more heart felt, not to mention interesting.


BSB

[Plane]

Frankly Sirs you aren't even remotely connected intellectually to the founding fathers. In fact you aren't even remotely related intellectually to the United States of America. You're just an internet blowhard with nothing to contribute to this forum let alone this country. You don't belong to a political party. You don't even belong to the NRA. You never took an oath to defend the constitution. What you say about our founding documents means absolutely nothing to me. In fact I'd be more interested in what some of our illegals have to say than you. It would be far more heart felt, not to mention interesting.


BSB

Why ad hominim?

You could just point out how he is wrong , or perhaps you can't because he isn't.

This is an actual instance of the second amendment not being at fault because this is a distant land without constitutional protection for arms.

The victim had a skull fracture and three bullet wounds, possibly because she was attacked with a pistol and a cricket bat.

So the pistol is no more the problem than the cricket bat is the problem.

The wielder of the weapon does not share the responsibility with the weapon itself, anyone who picks up a weapon takes on responsibility.

[BSB]

That's right, I didn't bring up the 2nd amendment, he did. I pointed out it had nothing to do with 2nd amendment. He didn't. Further I've never posted anything contrary to the 2nd amendment. All his allusions to the 2nd amendment in response to my posts are just crap. Further, I never said anything about a bat being more or less dangerous then a gun. You brought up the bat. I pointed out, correctly, that you don't have to be an athlete to kill someone with a bat. You seemed to think it was pertinent. It isn't. I could kill someone with a bat and I'm 68, no longer an athlete, with the loss of a limb just like him.

Anymore BS? 


BSB

[Xavier_Onassis]

Nothing that happens in South Africa has one damned thing to do with the second amendment. Sirs is wrong to allude to it in this case. And BSB's description of this jerk is right on the money. An internet blowhard with no credibility whatever, and not one damned thing useful to say.

[sirs]

Frankly Sirs you aren't even remotely connected intellectually to the founding fathers. In fact you aren't even remotely related intellectually to the United States of America. You're just an internet blowhard with nothing to contribute to this forum let alone this country. You don't belong to a political party. You don't even belong to the NRA. You never took an oath to defend the constitution. What you say about our founding documents means absolutely nothing to me. In fact I'd be more interested in what some of our illegals have to say than you. It would be far more heart felt, not to mention interesting.

Why ad hominim?  You could just point out how he is wrong , or perhaps you can't because he isn't.

It's just what he does.  It's actually SOP by hard core leftists....when unable to refute, throw garbage and try to sound superior

And the part that's really unfortunate, is this is a fella who fought and sacrificed for our freedoms, yet not grasp what freedom in this country really is   

[BSB]

"yet not grasp what freedom in this country really is"

Wrong again. I've said absolutely nothing that contradicts any freedom our founding fathers documented. And what's more you know it yet you continue to post the same bullshit. That makes you a liar, a fraud, and a creep.



BSB

[sirs]

actually you have...you freely advocate folks who should or should not have access to a gun, myself included.  You try, weakly, to hide behind semantics what is vs isn't an assault weapon and emotion as it relates to banning 1 type of semi-automatic weapon, but others, that killers can use just as easily are supposedly ok. 

Not just not grasping what real freedom is, as it relates to our Constitutional rights, but not having the cajones to address the real issues of violent crime and gun violence.  Here's a hint, its NOT about the gun.  When you can put your ideological blinders away, we'll actually be able to have a serious conversation and substantive brainstorming at what could be done

[BSB]

Hiding behind semantics. Translation, posting the facts. The facts being that banning a class of weapons is not contradictory to the constitution. The facts being that American citizens have the right to pursue their dreams without the threat of being killed by a weapon that the military uses in combat.  The only one playing semantic games is you. Ret. Gen McChrystal doesn't say that the AR15 is the same weapon our soldiers carry just to run his mouth off. He says it because its true. I say it because it's true. It's a fact because it's true. We know, we've carried them. You on the other hand haven't carried one. (and don't give me this dogshit about auto vs semi, any soldier will tell you that semi-auto is the most effective selection)

Freedom is having the right as a people to pick and chose. A lack of freedom is not having that right. The right to strengthen gun laws is a freedom. Not being able to is a lack of freedom. The only one advocating for a reduction of our liberties in this debate is you sirs. You're the one who knows nothing about what freedom means. You're the one who is using the constitution to reduce our liberties. But that's your game Sirs. Reducing choice all the while pretending it's strengthening our freedoms.

BSB

[sirs]

Don't even try pulling "facts", since you actively ignore most facts:
MORE lives are saved in this country using a gun, than those taken
LESS violent crime in areas with more permissive gun laws than those areas with much sctricter ones
DECREASING violent crime in this country with its "plethora of guns" vs countries like England which watch its violent crime continuing to grow

Those are FACTS

Freedom is FREEDOM.  FREEDOM to own a firearm, semiautomatic rifle in fact.  THAT RIGHT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, regardless of how mean looking the weapon is, SO SAYETH THE CONSTITUTION.  You don't like it, AMEND IT.  Yea, you're hiding behind semantics.  Currently it's "this class".  After the next massacre, it'll be "that class", and then it'll be another "class".  Again, your problem is that the gun is NOT the problem.  If you had some intellectual honesty here, you'd stand up and say ALL semi-automatic weapons should be banned, especially considering that's the VAST majority choice by murderers and gang members.  But no, you're hiding behind a weapon that is no different than any other magazine fed semi-auto.  It's just LOOKS like a military assault rifle. 

Gotta love this semantic summersault, my advocating freedom is somehow "reducing choice".  And a decrease in the rate of growth is actually a cut.  Only in leftist lingo   

[Xavier_Onassis]

The violent crime rate and the gunshot rate in England is a teensy percentage of the number of people that get blown away by guns here in the US.

Your beliefs are just that: beliefs. Fables that I refuse to swallow.

[BSB]

"It's just LOOKS like a military assault rifle"

You're so afraid of freedom that you want to restrict freedom of information. As Gen McChrystal and I both know the AR15 and the M16/M4 are the exact same gun. The only difference is one click on the selector switch. Easily remedied, as I've pointed out.

The AR15 has been the weapon of choice at 3 mass shootings I can think of without even trying. Duh. It will be banned. It will take several more years, but it will happen. It's that simple. In the mean time Democrats will keep winning the White House keeping it away from those who would restrict our freedom to chose a more beneficial, and productive path in this country. That's freedom. Using your evolutionarily selected brain to solve societal problems is freedom.  Making educated choices rather than dancing to a nostalgic rhythm is freedom. Living in the present, with an eye towards the future, rather than being controlled by the past is freedom. Not being so afraid that you have to carry a gun as if you lived in some Mexican, drug infested, boarder town, is freedom. Freedom loving people the world over constantly reject the status quo and replace it with new ideas, new products, new sciences, new blood. That is the freedom America was shaped for. That is the freedom people have uprooted and come to this country to benefit from. Selling an all too easy to use military killing machine to the public at large runs contrary to every freedom ever espoused by philosophers and statesmen alike throughout history. You lose Sirs. And you will keep on losing in ever increasing amounts. People like me, XO, and the fresh blood pouring into this country, will see to it. 



BSB

P.S. More people saved by guns then injured or killed? As XO points out, not a chance in hell.

[sirs]

No, they are NOT the same exact gun.  The military version has an automatic mode.  The semi-auto that the rest of us are "allowed" to own does NOT.

That's a FACT

If you try to "remodel it" as you claim, THAT's ILLEGAL as well

That's a FACT

The weapon of choice for the VAST majority of murders in this country, numbering in the THOUSANDS, is NOT an AR-15 or even a semi-automatic rifle, for that matter.

That's a FACT

You want to focus all this wrath on 1 CLASS of weapon, based on 3, count'em 3 massacres, while you ignore the thousands killed with all sorts of different classes, demonstrates the egregious inconsistency, in your platform

So, yea, you and xo can continue to ignore all those inconvenient facts, such as more lives saved, but that's at your credibility door.  I'm comfortable having the facts on my side, not to mention the Constitution, that......what was that again?...oh yea, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

And go stuff your "restriction in freedom of information" crap somewhere, where it might at least sound true.  It holds no water here