[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?[/QUOTE]
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate. [/QUOTE]
When you say strict gun control, do you mean that it's illegal to own a gun? Or just that you're not supposed to take it out in public and that you might have to wait a couple of days before getting your hands on a new one?
I simply can't understand how an entire nation (sorry for the generalisation) can have such a hard-on for guns then be surprised when the crime rates are high or when some nutter decides to take his hunting rifle on a little sniping practice like happened in DC a few years back, or even when a kid snaps and, instead of going out and smashing a couple of windows, takes an automatic rifle into school and starts shooting.
These things won't change until the USA finally realises that the 'right to bear arms' meant something very different and a whole lot more important in 1776 than it does now, and that this ridiculous law needs to be changed, or better, abolished, no matter what the lobbyists and hillbillys and Charlton Heston (the most insensitive man in the entire world) might say. I just hope that whoever gets to live at the white house next has the balls to do something about it.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
It is also idiotic to think for one minute that making guns illegal will keep criminals from using them at will......
The birds Cheney was "hunting" didn't have a chance in hell. Reportedly he shot over 70 pheasants that day, and some mallard ducks as well. It was at an exclusive hunting club where the birds are all pen-reared and then released to be shot by the patrons of this club. What is the challenge of shooting an animal reared in captivity with no way to escape? This club released over 500 pen-reared pheasants for the benefit of Cheney's hunting party. The group killed over 417 birds. That isn't sport, or a challenge. That is just killing for the sake of killing.
Sickening.
Sickening.
Banning guns unilaterally wouldn't stop people from using them, DUH. But - remind me exactly how having less guns around hurts anyone? There's always some moron who keeps a gun in their house and then the kid gets a hold of it and BLAM - the next school shooting.
If you ask me, there's always been arsehole criminals, since mankind first knew how to throw rocks at each other. There'll always be gun violence, but the idea of just handing out guns like showbags is completely moronic and says a lot about any nation's government that endorses it.
I mean what *exactly* do you propose to do with your gun? Shoot someone in self defense? What if you completely misinterpret what they were doing, and they weren't attacking you at all? Chalk it up to 'bad luck'? Please.
Let's not get started on when your kids say 'cool, neat toy gun' and start playing with the fucker, and don't tell me these things are child-proof because kids are better at getting through that kind of shit than one would think.
If it means more elected officials will take potshots at each other while hunting, then I'd happily say guns should stay. Otherwise, this primitive shit has to go out the window.
If you ask me, there's always been arsehole criminals, since mankind first knew how to throw rocks at each other. There'll always be gun violence, but the idea of just handing out guns like showbags is completely moronic and says a lot about any nation's government that endorses it.
I mean what *exactly* do you propose to do with your gun? Shoot someone in self defense? What if you completely misinterpret what they were doing, and they weren't attacking you at all? Chalk it up to 'bad luck'? Please.
Let's not get started on when your kids say 'cool, neat toy gun' and start playing with the fucker, and don't tell me these things are child-proof because kids are better at getting through that kind of shit than one would think.
If it means more elected officials will take potshots at each other while hunting, then I'd happily say guns should stay. Otherwise, this primitive shit has to go out the window.
"thats about as stupid as taking a pencil away, because the potential of being stabbed in the eye! or nail clippers! yes lets take nail clippers away because it hurts if you cut te nail too low! oh the humanity! *grumbles*"
- that's just wrong. Yes, a great deal of objects can be used to inflict harm, but are you seriously saying that a pencil is as lethal as a gun?
When I hear of someone going on a killing spree using a pencil, then I will agree with you.
- that's just wrong. Yes, a great deal of objects can be used to inflict harm, but are you seriously saying that a pencil is as lethal as a gun?
When I hear of someone going on a killing spree using a pencil, then I will agree with you.
its a mistake that all the american comedians are going to love
And now the guy that Cheney shot has had a mild heart attack:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/politics/14cnd-cheney.html?hp&ex=1139979600&en=63a05f9718052989&ei=5094&partner=homepage
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/politics/14cnd-cheney.html?hp&ex=1139979600&en=63a05f9718052989&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Such an embarassment. I look forward to 2008 when him and bush are gone...
Well, there was another, much bigger embarrassment during the Clinton administration - but to be honest, I don't think either embarrassment should have had any bearing on their Presidencies.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, there was another, much bigger embarrassment during the Clinton administration - but to be honest, I don't think either embarrassment should have had any bearing on their Presidencies.[/QUOTE]
I thought Iraq was our biggest embarassment.
Besides, nobody died because an intern sucked the president's cock.
Personally I'd much rather hear about Clinton's DNA milkshake stains on a blue dress than hearing about another innocent person who died on an unjustified war.
I thought Iraq was our biggest embarassment.
Besides, nobody died because an intern sucked the president's cock.
Personally I'd much rather hear about Clinton's DNA milkshake stains on a blue dress than hearing about another innocent person who died on an unjustified war.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]and they better not get that stupid "conceal carry" law passed. Why not just invite someone to shoot you?[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, so in other words, women shouldn't have any right to protect themselves from being raped, and what about potential gay-bashing victims? (www.pinkpistols.org) If Matthew Shepard had had a gun on his person, that tragedy would NOT have occurred.
It would have been:
McK: We're not gay, and you're gonna get jacked.
Shep: Well, I AM gay, and you're gonna get shot. (pulls .22) [/QUOTE]
I second that!
Everybody in America should own a gun because it's the best way to protect ourselves. Let's stop teaching our kids how to read and write and let's give the little rascals something they can use to let everybody else know not to mess with them. That will for sure put an end to bullying and abusive parenting.
Oh yeah, so in other words, women shouldn't have any right to protect themselves from being raped, and what about potential gay-bashing victims? (www.pinkpistols.org) If Matthew Shepard had had a gun on his person, that tragedy would NOT have occurred.
It would have been:
McK: We're not gay, and you're gonna get jacked.
Shep: Well, I AM gay, and you're gonna get shot. (pulls .22) [/QUOTE]
I second that!
Everybody in America should own a gun because it's the best way to protect ourselves. Let's stop teaching our kids how to read and write and let's give the little rascals something they can use to let everybody else know not to mess with them. That will for sure put an end to bullying and abusive parenting.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?[/QUOTE]
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate. [/QUOTE]
You're always manipulating facts to support your point. DC has had one of the highest crime rates in the nation for many, many years. Long before the gun ban of 76 (or whatever year it was). So please do not try to make it appear as if DC's crime rate has only become a problem since the ban. Your facts are always subjective....I don't think your brain is capable of objective thought. Pull your head out of Charlton Heston's asshole and find some unbiased info.
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate. [/QUOTE]
You're always manipulating facts to support your point. DC has had one of the highest crime rates in the nation for many, many years. Long before the gun ban of 76 (or whatever year it was). So please do not try to make it appear as if DC's crime rate has only become a problem since the ban. Your facts are always subjective....I don't think your brain is capable of objective thought. Pull your head out of Charlton Heston's asshole and find some unbiased info.
Nice language....
Why does everything like this have to go in the gutter?
Are some folks simply unable to sustain a conversation without name calling, bullying, and general boorish-ness?
Amazing.
Why does everything like this have to go in the gutter?
Are some folks simply unable to sustain a conversation without name calling, bullying, and general boorish-ness?
Amazing.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Haystacks Calhoun wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Nice language....
Why does everything like this have to go in the gutter? [/QUOTE]
If by "in the gutter", you are referring to the fact that I used the word "asshole" in my post, this thread first went to the gutter around 7 posts into it when the f-bomb was dropped, and not by me. And there was no name-calling in my post. And if I misunderstood your post or it wasn't directed towards me, allow me to apologize in advance.
Why does everything like this have to go in the gutter? [/QUOTE]
If by "in the gutter", you are referring to the fact that I used the word "asshole" in my post, this thread first went to the gutter around 7 posts into it when the f-bomb was dropped, and not by me. And there was no name-calling in my post. And if I misunderstood your post or it wasn't directed towards me, allow me to apologize in advance.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, there was another, much bigger embarrassment during the Clinton administration - but to be honest, I don't think either embarrassment should have had any bearing on their Presidencies.[/QUOTE]
I thought Iraq was our biggest embarassment.
Besides, nobody died because an intern sucked the president's cock.
Personally I'd much rather hear about Clinton's DNA milkshake stains on a blue dress than hearing about another innocent person who died on an unjustified war.[/QUOTE]
Well, the justifiability of the war is at least debatable.
Either way, the main point was that certain things should be relevant to a person's presidency, and other things should not. The war belongs in the former category. A quail hunting mishap belongs in the latter.
I thought Iraq was our biggest embarassment.
Besides, nobody died because an intern sucked the president's cock.
Personally I'd much rather hear about Clinton's DNA milkshake stains on a blue dress than hearing about another innocent person who died on an unjustified war.[/QUOTE]
Well, the justifiability of the war is at least debatable.
Either way, the main point was that certain things should be relevant to a person's presidency, and other things should not. The war belongs in the former category. A quail hunting mishap belongs in the latter.