Where I stand on americas gun "laws"

Cannabis.Queen

Cannabis.Queen

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
5'3" 115lbs does not sound healthy to me

I may be ignorant, but shouldn't you weigh somewhere near 150lbs?
Click to expand...
I was 150 and still overweight. If I gain more muscle then I'll be fine at that weight but as of now 150 is way out of my range lol female and men have different body weights that are concidered healthy. A man my height and weight would look completely different. My waist is a 24" and myna hips are 42" so it's just how I'm built.
 
Cannabis.Queen

Cannabis.Queen

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
CQ, how much alcohol does it take you to get drunk?
Click to expand...
Maybe 7 tall boys if I got gun them and don't eat that whole day. If I ate, 10 beers ; if I sip, more than that. My tolerance has nothing to do with my weight, I've been drinking since I was 13.. but yet pot was soooooo bad .. -.-
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Cannabis.Queen said:
I was 150 and still overweight. If I gain more muscle then I'll be fine at that weight but as of now 150 is way out of my range lol female and men have different body weights that are concidered healthy. A man my height and weight would look completely different. My waist is a 24" and myna hips are 42" so it's just how I'm built.
Click to expand...
I am an idiot. I assumed your numbers were for a male's body. Absolutely dumbfounded when second reading "queen" in your name..

lol..

150 for a woman at 5'3" is a lot more than it would be for a male..

...duh...
 
LEDandCoffee

LEDandCoffee

Well-Known Member
NaturalFarmer said:
Both charts show that the gun buyback did very little in regards to homicide and suicide and only continued following its course.







"Gun confiscation is not happening in the United States any time soon. But let’s suppose it did. How would it work? Australia’s program netted, at the low end, 650,000 guns, and at the high end, a million. That was approximately a fifth to a third of Australian firearms. There are about as many guns in America as there are people: 310 million of both in 2009. A fifth to a third would be between 60 and 105 million guns. To achieve in America what was done in Australia, in other words, the government would have to confiscate as many as 105 million firearms."


https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/10/australia-gun-control-obama-america/
Click to expand...
Finally, someone with some common sense.
 
Ripped Farmer

Ripped Farmer

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Right, you say that gun control laws won't work because the US is awash in guns. Then you say don't comment on your circular and fallacious argument.
Click to expand...
No I never said that anywhere. That is your own creation. I specifically addressed gun buy back programs and nothing else. They dont work, period.

I made no reference of any kind to any other form(s) of gun control or to their effectiveness or whether I support them or not.




Fogdog said:
Right, you say that gun control laws won't work because the US is awash in guns. Then you say don't comment on your circular and fallacious argument.

I don't disagree that people with hordes of guns won't turn them in and probably only a fraction will even register them. Then again, how many are predisposed to mass shootings? So, gun control laws needn't be determined effective or not based upon how many people still own an armory-sized horde (not many do but those who do have a huge number). Gun control laws are determined effective based upon reductions in harm. This is quite thoroughly proven to be true.
Click to expand...

Again, I specifically was addressing gun buy back programs. And again, they dont work.

Again, I made no reference of any kind to all other forms of gun control and their effectiveness or whether I support them or not.



Fogdog said:
The answer to the guns already out there is to give it time. People with their horde can keep them. They can't show them off and if they do, so what? The objective is reduction in harm, remember. Most of those people are old fuckers and when they die, their heirs, most of them, won't want to go through the paperwork to establish legal ownership and turn them over to the govt. Problem solved.
Click to expand...
What does that even mean? Why would they establish "legal ownership" just to turn them in? Or if I misread why wouldn't they go through the paperwork and establish legal ownership like they already do? Wouldn't they be more likely to hide and keep them along with all the ammunition? How does this stop someone from using them to harm people? It might stop a lot of accidents, but people on a mission to kill that have access probably aren't going to be deterred one bit.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
The Last 2 Weeks Have Convinced Americans Gun Reform Could Happen



Just saying that when the super majority that don't own guns start to question why they should accept the harm wrought but the tiny minority who own guns, gun owners will get run over. It might take a while to get gun control laws enacted because we've still an entrenched right wing gun lobby owned congress. The change in sentiment reflected above and the fact that "NRA supporter" is a title politicians now want to distance themselves from is strikingly new. Quite a change from just a year ago.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Ripped Farmer said:
No I never said that anywhere. That is your own creation. I specifically addressed gun buy back programs and nothing else. They dont work, period.

I made no reference of any kind to any other form(s) of gun control or to their effectiveness or whether I support them or not.







Again, I specifically was addressing gun buy back programs. And again, they dont work.

Again, I made no reference of any kind to all other forms of gun control and their effectiveness or whether I support them or not.





What does that even mean? Why would they establish "legal ownership" just to turn them in? Or if I misread why wouldn't they go through the paperwork and establish legal ownership like they already do? Wouldn't they be more likely to hide and keep them along with all the ammunition? How does this stop someone from using them to harm people? It might stop a lot of accidents, but people on a mission to kill that have access probably aren't going to be deterred one bit.
Click to expand...
Of course you are denying that gun laws work. Why else would you talk about how gun owners won't turn in guns?

"The answer to the guns already out there is to give it time. People with their horde can keep them. They can't show them off and if they do, so what? The objective is reduction in harm, remember. Most of those people are old fuckers and when they die, their heirs, most of them, won't want to go through the paperwork to establish legal ownership and turn them over to the govt. Problem solved."

If you can't read it, try sounding it out.
 
Ripped Farmer

Ripped Farmer

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Of course you are denying that gun laws work. Why else would you talk about how gun owners won't turn in guns?

"The answer to the guns already out there is to give it time. People with their horde can keep them. They can't show them off and if they do, so what? The objective is reduction in harm, remember. Most of those people are old fuckers and when they die, their heirs, most of them, won't want to go through the paperwork to establish legal ownership and turn them over to the govt. Problem solved."

If you can't read it, try sounding it out.
Click to expand...

So you really think they wont do the paperwork? I did paperwork when a relative passed for a 1911 that was handed down to me. Like hell I was gonna just give it up just because. Families with firearms shoot together, so heirs are most likely to keep them since it was a gift from a relative lost. The half life you are hoping for I just dont see being a realistic reduction over any reasonable amount of time. In fact I would expect a massive uptick in illegal manufacturing.

Keep the gun buy backs for those types. They dont want them then let them turn them in, no issues there. But to think it has any effect on criminals using firearms to hurt people is asinine.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Ripped Farmer said:
So you really think they wont do the paperwork? I did paperwork when a relative passed for a 1911 that was handed down to me. Like hell I was gonna just give it up just because. Families with firearms shoot together, so heirs are most likely to keep them since it was a gift from a relative lost. The half life you are hoping for I just dont see being a realistic reduction over any reasonable amount of time. In fact I would expect a massive uptick in illegal manufacturing.

Keep the gun buy backs for those types. They dont want them then let them turn them in, no issues there. But to think it has any effect on criminals using firearms to hurt people is asinine.
Click to expand...
They might. In which case, again, problem solved. Tracking guns and ensuring ownership is legal is part of a sane and comprehensive gun control bill. Tracking gun ownership makes it harder for those who shouldn't have guns to get them. You keep harping on how guns won't go away just because of gun control laws and I'm totally in agreement with you.

The objective, however, isn't to eliminate gun ownership, it's to reduce harm from guns. It is a well known fact that well thought out gun control laws and rational enforcement accomplish this.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
roony said:
Gun laws only apply to law abiding citizens the people that are not allowed or don't care to follow the law are the ones commiting these acts and I don't see where making more law that make it harder for law abiding citizens to get and keep guns would change that fact
Click to expand...
This is 100% literal nra propaganda
 
Huckster79

Huckster79

Well-Known Member
This is gunna go like gay marriage, they fought us like hell, and told us society would damn near implode instantaneously if we allowed it... now for most part its either crickets or quiet semi support of it...

None of them are making a serious charge to get full autos legal... they seem to have accepted that as a given, and they will once assault rifles are banned and its clear the majority wants this, they will then abandon the gun fervor only to focus on some other culture war battle they can stir fear with and fight societal maturing and progress with...
 
Last edited:
Ripped Farmer

Ripped Farmer

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
they've worked on every single country that's done them.
Click to expand...

They work in making a big collection of guns to be destroyed from owners who for whatever reason do not want them around. As far as crime statistics go, what little they have curbed some gun violence in some areas is small in comparison to the amount of firearms, time and money spent to collect.

Spend that same time money into firearm safety training, and teach people to respect these firearms and I would bet the results would curb crime much more than destroying a few firearms does.
 
Ripped Farmer

Ripped Farmer

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Regarding self-harm which obesity clearly is, I'm OK with that. I'm also OK with gun owners using their gun to commit suicide.
Click to expand...
Im so glad you said this. So cut out all the self inflicted purposeful/accidental deaths by firearms, and we are left with less than 1% of all deaths in the United States being attributed to firearm violence. And of that 80% of all firearm related homicides are gang related. So 11k-ish homicides by firearm and 80% were gang related. Pretty sure those gang members didn't have registered legal firearms and obviously they didn't use them as prescribed.


Sad when any innocent life is lost for any reason, but to use it as fuel to take things away that 99.9% of the time are used in a manner that no one is hurt or killed is a knee jerk reaction at best. Millions of rounds being produced daily, yet only only a few are aimed to harm.

I am seriously more worried about bleached coffee filters than I am this.

I'll just leave this here in case we try make anything up.

"These deaths consisted of 11,208 homicides, 21,175 suicides, 505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms use with "undetermined intent". Of the 2,596,993 total deaths in the US in 2013, 1.3% were related to firearms."

"In fact, a staggering 80% of gun homicides are gang-related. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), gang homicides accounted for roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun murders in both 2010 and 2011."


Not many deaths left for us to pin on gun loving righties who voted for Trump.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Ripped Farmer said:
Im so glad you said this. So cut out all the self inflicted purposeful/accidental deaths by firearms, and we are left with less than 1% of all deaths in the United States being attributed to firearm violence. And of that 80% of all firearm related homicides are gang related. So 11k-ish homicides by firearm and 80% were gang related. Pretty sure those gang members didn't have registered legal firearms and obviously they didn't use them as prescribed.


Sad when any innocent life is lost for any reason, but to use it as fuel to take things away that 99.9% of the time are used in a manner that no one is hurt or killed is a knee jerk reaction at best. Millions of rounds being produced daily, yet only only a few are aimed to harm.

I am seriously more worried about bleached coffee filters than I am this.

I'll just leave this here in case we try make anything up.

"These deaths consisted of 11,208 homicides, 21,175 suicides, 505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms use with "undetermined intent". Of the 2,596,993 total deaths in the US in 2013, 1.3% were related to firearms."

"In fact, a staggering 80% of gun homicides are gang-related. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), gang homicides accounted for roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun murders in both 2010 and 2011."


Not many deaths left for us to pin on gun loving righties who voted for Trump.
Click to expand...
You trump and gunz supporters all say the same thing. Thoughts and prayers. "Car accidents kill more people" or some such oblivious nonsense.

Yeah, only 17 kids died in Parkland. The entire community was traumatized. The entire school body have had a part of their childhood ripped away. Probably hundreds saw their friends gunned down in front of them. How many of those kids will die from PTSD related issues? Not just Parkland. We have the same happen somewhere practically every month. Not only that but kids are going through active shooter drills all across the country. What an idiotic thing to say. "It's a fraction of the people who die each year". As if dying from kidney failure is anything like gun homicides. Listen to the people from Parkland. They say "no more of this". They want none of this for other towns and cities. Practically all of this gun violence is preventable.

It's not as if this is an either-or question. Do we work to reduce kidney disease or gun murders? How about doing both?
 
Last edited:
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Ripped Farmer said:
cut out all the self inflicted purposeful/accidental deaths by firearms, and we are left with less than 1% of all deaths in the United States being attributed to firearm violence.
Click to expand...
"if we just get rid of all the firearm violence then there is less firearm violence"

jesus christ you radicalized extremist trump fanatics are some really fucking dumb motherfuckers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top