Started By
Message

re: Obama's CDC study on Firearms.

Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:44 pm to
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:44 pm to
quote:

I think I've unlocked the "Completely Ignored" achievement


It's a great place to be. You can still make your points, without dealing with her stupidity.
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
22253 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:44 pm to
quote:

SO WHAT GOOD IS TAKING AWAY GUNS FROM LAW ABIDING CITIZENS?!?!?


A) You should probably take your meds.

B) Who's wanting to take guns away from law-abiding citizens? You keep throwing that straw man around, but go back and read what I suggested as changes. None of those fall into this category.

C) Taking guns away from non law-abiding citizens will lower the number of people killed by guns in this country.

quote:

you have absolutely no way to prove the numbers would go down as a result of any legislation.


There are a number of studies backing my point, and none backing yours. Welcome to reality!
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
59194 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:45 pm to
quote:

largely similar economic status


Is this the standard? You are good with using this as the sole standard? You sure?
Posted by civiltiger07
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2011
15062 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:45 pm to
quote:

OECD


Mexico and Brazil are part of this.
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
22253 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:45 pm to
quote:

Of course they were. What he did is already illegal.


Usually the goal is to prevent mass shootings, not mop up after them.

But you really should get back to work on your analysis.
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:46 pm to
quote:

Taking guns away from non law-abiding citizens will lower the number of people killed by guns in this country.


It should be illegal for people who can't legally possess firearms to possess firearms. That'll do it.
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
59194 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:46 pm to
quote:

It's a great place to be. You can still make your points, without dealing with her stupidity



I don't know why I get drawn in. The stupidity and bootstrap arguments are mesmerizing. I try to engage...I don't know why I haven't learned. One day I will get to ignored status and enjoy the freedoms you do.
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:47 pm to
quote:

Usually the goal is to prevent mass shootings, not mop up after them.


Mass shootings should be illegal. That'd stop them.

You owe me a paper.

I'm patient.
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
59194 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:48 pm to
quote:

Usually the goal is to prevent mass shootings, not mop up after them.


You are faaaaar more likely to be killed by an illegal alien than in a school schooling. More illegal aliens equals more deaths caused by illegal aliens.

Are you consistent? Do you promote banning illegal aliens?
This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 7:49 pm
Posted by Aristo
Colorado
Member since Jan 2007
13292 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:49 pm to
quote:

Usually the goal is to prevent mass shootings, not mop up after them


What new law will prevent the next mass shooting?
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
45856 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:50 pm to
Hello. Please address these three points. Otherwise I'll just assume you can't, and therefore your line of reasoning is utter horseshite.

quote:

The Colt AR-15 isn't the weapon developed by ArmaLite for the military.




quote:

How is the AR-15 different from the Mini-14? Exact details please.




quote:

It's primary purpose and reason for construction was the transport of troops and supplies for national defense. The fact we get to use it as a quick way between cities is the nice side effect.
This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 7:51 pm
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
22253 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:50 pm to
quote:

Please address these three points first before commenting on my later posts.


quote:

1. The Colt AR-15 isn't the weapon developed by ArmaLite for the military.
2. How is the AR-15 different from the Mini-14? Exact details please.
3. It's primary purpose and reason for construction was the transport of troops and supplies for national defense. The fact we get to use it as a quick way between cities is the nice side effect.


1. The removal of one mode of fire from the AR-15 to sell it to civilians doesn't invalidate that the weapon itself was solely designed for the military. Removing the turret from a tank doesn't make a tank any less solely designed for military use.

2. If you can tell me which of the AR-15 and the mini-14 are banned for sale at Dick's and Wal-Mart, and why, then I'll tell you the differences. As it is, I'll defer to the expertise of the largest sellers of firearms in this country as to what falls into the particular class of guns we're discussing. Why won't you?

3. I disagree with your assertion that the primary purpose was for movement of troops and supplies - that was certainly a benefit, and even a main one, but the IHS was always a civilian network. But even if your assertion were true, you're confusing the words "sole" and "primary".
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:50 pm to
It just takes patience. I can deal with her stupidity indefinitely. The secret is that I don't care about anything she has to say.
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
22253 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:51 pm to
quote:

Right, and this is because you don't understand the topic.


Any time you want to just discuss the topic instead of this shite show, you provide that analysis and we'll go off to the races.

But until you've shown yourself capable of that (which we both know you can't do, despite your bravado), you really shouldn't be making broad pronouncements. You have work to do!
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:51 pm to
quote:

Dick's and Wal-Mart
quote:

expertise




No wonder you're always wrong.

Posted by civiltiger07
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2011
15062 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:52 pm to
quote:

I'll defer to the expertise of the largest sellers of firearms in this countr


STOP SAYING THIS!

It’s simply not true

quote:

If you can tell me which of the AR-15 and the mini-14 are banned for sale at Dick's and Wal-Mart, and why


I would love to know the answer too! But my guess is that these retailers aren’t the “experts” you think they are and they watch way to much CNN.
This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 7:56 pm
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:53 pm to
quote:

Any time you want to just discuss the topic instead of this shite show, you provide that analysis and we'll go off to the races.


You owe me work. I can wait.

I'm patient.


Posted by Aristo
Colorado
Member since Jan 2007
13292 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:53 pm to
quote:

I can deal with her stupidity indefinitely.


Good because it appears to be infinite.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
45856 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:53 pm to
quote:

The removal of one mode of fire from the AR-15 to sell it to civilians doesn't invalidate that the weapon itself was solely designed for the military.


Actually it does. The features that made it useful for the military are no longer there. But that would require you to understand suppressing fire and similar topics.

quote:

Removing the turret from a tank doesn't make a tank any less solely designed for military use.



Removing the turret from a tank makes it not a tank.

quote:

If you can tell me which of the AR-15 and the mini-14 are banned for sale at Dick's and Wal-Mart, and why, then I'll tell you the differences. As it is, I'll defer to the expertise of the largest sellers of firearms in this country as to what falls into the particular class of guns we're discussing. Why won't you?


This doesn't answer my question. What are the differences between an AR-15 and a Mini-14? With details please.

quote:

I disagree with your assertion that the primary purpose was for movement of troops and supplies


That's fine. But you are wrong. A cursory google search will show you this.

quote:

But even if your assertion were true, you're confusing the words "sole" and "primary".


No, I'm not.

Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
22253 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 7:53 pm to
quote:

He threatened to shoot up the school. They should have at least picked him up and could have charged him with terrorism.


Reportedly - have they released any evidence to that effect?

And even an arrest (and charge, which would have quickly been dropped) would not have required him to give up his guns.

So, like I said, there was nothing they could do under current Florida law.
Jump to page
Page First 28 29 30 31 32 ... 58
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 30 of 58Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram