Barack Obama MUST win so that we can ban all guns
georgec...@gmail.com
America, she will be too busy stoking the fires of war in places like
Iraq, Afganistan, Iran, and Syria.
We cannot trust neo-liberal tool John Edwards, he will spend all his
political stock fighting for a much needed tax increase on the wealthy
to fund universal healthcare for the poor. His priority is medical
problems, not criminal ones.
Barack Obama as a black man who works hard to reduce violence in Kenya
and participates in other programs beneficial to Africa knows more
about violence than white liberals could ever envision and will work
to insure guns are wiped out and that the sweeping increases in gun
crime are halted.
We have all these states today passing laws allowing violent felons to
carry concealed weapons and look at the skyrocketing crime.
Washington DC is the murder capital of the world!!!
Barack has been criticized for refusing to recite the pledge of
allegiance or put his hand on his heart when others recite it, but
this is simply his way of refusing to pledge alliegance to the gun
culture of the United States.
The only thing about Obama that bothers me is that he is a devout
xtian who attends a goody-goody church. If he were to disavow the
xtian faith and the old bearded man in the sky, perhaps the atheists
of this great nation could breath a sigh of relief knowing that
mandatory religion will not be signed into law under his watch.
Barack Obama for a non-violent United States! This is change that we
need!
Hal Womack 3-dan
ON?
By Hal Womack 3-dan
http://www.myspace.com/halwomack
"georgeching2" seems to have flushed his brains down the toilet and
put the other stuff between his ears.
Ain't nobody talking about "banning guns", that's just pure hooey from
the folks in the black helicopters --only fools think they're a joke--
who brought you the US Pentagon-C.I.A. massacres at My Lai, El Mozote,
Fallujah, the Mount Carmel Center near Waco and so forth all around
the bloody world.
What the Jews and their so-called "liberal" tools are really talking
about = taking your rent and lunch money to buy ever more guns for
their secret police and soldier zombies. Then they want to use these
mercenaries to disarm the civilian population of the USA.
If you think that the IRS, the Phone Company and your landlord are
starting to treat you like a Palestinian now, then how do you think
they plan to behave after they've grabbed your gun?
We honorable people of the USA need to join hands with the rest of the
world and lock up the whole kabal of war criminals, including all of
the Network TV presidential candidates, who are murdering children in
Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Colombia and you name it. The star-gazers
tell us that we've got only about 30 billion years before our Sun
burns out, so we better hop to it, right?
================================
Other Resources:
Abir Aramin, age 9, murdered by the Jews
on Tuesday, January 16, 2007, her picture:
http://tinyurl.com/2l6ogh
An Israeli mother, a Jewess, comments on the story:
http://tinyurl.com/3amvos
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h3P7POHnJc
...............................................................
Here's the link to what I wrote on the eve of SonnaBush's (fronting
for Aerial Shaboom) invasion of Iraq:
http://tinyurl.com/2xcvdo
(The tag end of the piece was stuck on rather roughly by the HANDSTAND
editor & could profit from a bit of pruning.)
If any reader can find another article from that critical moment which
has better stood the test of time, will she please be so kind as to
tell me about it?
...........................................................................
For Susan Abulhawa's new novel of Palestine, SCAR OF DAVID (2006)
http://www.scarofdavid.com/blog/index.php?page_id=5
OR
http://tinyurl.com/2n77bo
...................................................................
http://www.americanfreepress.net/
FINAL JUDGMENT by Michael Collins Piper, first published in 1994 and
now in its 6th edition, lays out the Jewish background to the JFK hit
in >600 fascinating pages (which badly need editing, evenso --attn:
M&W).
(See the AFP site above also for the moving letter of 29 November 2006
from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, directly addressed to
"Noble Americans" --maybe your local jewspaper forgot to pass it along
to you?)
On the AFP site linked above I just now (Tuesday 071211)
found the following Michael More out-take from Sicko about a certain
northern country:
http://tinyurl.com/23zgxu
.....................................................................
Five Principal Joojingo or "JJ" resources:
1. http://www.aipac.org/
2. The Bronfmen @ http://www.acbp.net/
3. http://www.jinsa.org/home/home.html
4. http://www.adl.org/
5. http://www.hasbara.co.il/
Four Righteous Jewish Antidotes:
1. http://www.ostrovskyfineart.com/index.htm
2. http://www.nkusa.org/index.cfm
3. http://www.israelshamir.net/
4. http://tinyurl.com/3c9jm8 OR
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/18/136217
........................................................
All rise,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRvVzaQ6i8A
http://www.counterpunch.org/dolby04032007.html
This clip was the first time I ever saw Marvin Gaye perform. The word
in my mind = "composure".
..........................................................................
Kidz Today:
A) Iron Maiden The Trooper By Gauchos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4aGXTHo7w&mode=related&search
B) The Impeach Bush Club Parade
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4606006427048738351
...............................................................
Flag of USrael:
http://www.nogw.com/images/inminds.jpg
http://www.ussliberty.org/
http://www.aztlan.net/women_martyrs.htm
http://www.jewwatch.com/
http://margaritaville.com/
[cartoon panel]
http://tinyurl.com/2kyyc9 OR
http://www.miqel.com/images_1/random_image/r1/get-your-war-on2.gif
.............................................
http://www.hizbollah.org/
http://tinyurl.com/2r3stp
http://peyote.com/gardening-pictures/peyote.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/3dlhhb
http://www.currentissues.tv/
http://www.waco93.com/
("Nadine Eats Pizza in Ramallah")
http://www.israelshamir.net/Contributors/Contributor47.htm
http://tinyurl.com/yqd75d (Akaber Zaid)
http://www.counterpunch.org/levy03272006.html
http://vcnv.org/
http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=1
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=491
http://www.americanempireproject.com/index.asp
http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html
http://www.rense.com/1.imagesD/dbaby4.jpg
http://www.nelsonmandela.org/
http://www.parnasse.com/gaia.jpg
http://www.sf911truth.org/
http://www.documentaryphotographs.com/
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
http://www.aztlan.net/
http://www.valleyofthewolvesiraq.com/high/main.html
http://www.johnkaminski.com/
http://electronicintifada.net/new.shtml
http://dahrjamailiraq.com/index.php
http://antiwar.com/
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/index.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
http://www.infowars.com/
http://english.wafa.ps/default.asp
http://www.araboo.com/site/arab-aaug-asq-9777
http://www.al-awda.org/
http://www.imemc.org/
http://www.vcnv.org/
http://www.ziopedia.org/content/view/3301/58/
http://antiwar.com/
http://www.cnionline.org/
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=
http://www.honestmediatoday.com/index.htm
http://prorev.com/indexa.htm
http://www.thankyoult.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
http://www.deiryassin.org/index1.html
http://www.marwenmedia.com/index.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
http://www.thehandstand.org/
http://www.malaysiasun.com/
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
http://tinyurl.com/79t3d
http://tinyurl.com/yt4tym ("Let It Be!")
http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,150 for "free your mind, the rest will
follow".
===================
mat...@lwssc.com
Gun History
Whether you agree or not, it's an interesting lesson in history.
Something for each of us to think about...
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953,
about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From1915 to 1917, 1.5
million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves
were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From1948 to 1952, 20 million
political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981,
100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From1971 to 1979, 300,000
Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one
million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
because of gun control: 56 million.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced
by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by
their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than
$500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up
300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them
in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in
the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey
is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and
assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to
explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort
and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of
guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above
prove it.
You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear our
president, governors or other politicians disseminating this
information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and,
yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans.....before it's too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind
them of this history lesson. With guns, we are "citizens ." Without
them, we are "subjects."
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control
message.
Don't let anyone try to make us feel bad, because we own weapons.
We're the good guys.
Smirnoff
There are no good guys. Only nuts with guns that think they are brave when
they are really cowards.
"booboo £ ¥ 0/00 :)"
Sanders Kaufman
wrote in message news:l1d1p39bdscahqt4c...@4ax.com...
>
> stop cross posting to inappropriate groups, it only hurts a good
> message like this. Troll behavior on legit topics like this show gun
> owners as nutters who can't follow simple etiquette.
A lot of us used to think gun-nuts could be reasoned with.
It's a lot of fun to think of gun-owners as responsible, revolutionary-war
era patriots out to defend the fatherland.
But that's not who they are.
That's why the term "gun nut" is the most frequent one used to describe gun
rights advocates.
It's not just a derrogatory term; it's who they are.
Personally - I think we should offer unlimited, free gun licenses to
everyone in the country.
Then, whoever applies is put on the gun-nut list, and forbidden from trading
in weaponry.
That way the folks who just use 'em like the tools they should be, and
without making a production of it, can quietly defend their homes.
Smirnoff
> Never happen.
What will never happen? My claim is that most gun owners are fools and
cowards. What will never happen? That you will be able to parse?
mat...@lwssc.com
you.
I own a gun and feel I am not a coward. I own a competitive shotgun
for shooting sporting clays & skeet.
If you feel guns are wrong that is your option and your right. I do
not feel that all people should handle guns either. I have been
trained and get retrained often.
Run a search for a city in Georgia where guns were required. Then run
a search for a city, I think it was in NC, where guns were banned.
Then compare the 0% crime rate (not including misdemeanors - they
still had some speeding) to over 60% (been a few years I want to say
higher but not sure.)
If someone is willing to kill someone, what makes you think they will
abide by a gun ban? If that happened only criminals would have a gun.
Even if you got rid of all guns, there are still killings with knifes,
bats, rope, pencils, automobiles...
Another trouble is, if you ban one thing then it is a slippery slope.
Next is a complete ban on cigarettes, then alcohol, then fast-
food, ...then freedom of the press.
mat...@lwssc.com
one of a few citys that banned pistol was Washington, D.C.; see below;
"Before the District banned handguns in 1976, the murder rate had been
declining. But soon afterward, the rate climbed to the highest of all
large U.S. cities. It also rose relative to nearby Maryland and
Virginia as well as relative to other cities with more than 500,000
people. During the 31-year life of the ban, with the exception of a
few years during which the city's murder rate ranked second or third,
there have been more killings per capita in Washington, D.C. than in
any other major city." http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8717
Rip
"Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
news:6MYjj.676$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
You totally suck.
>
Smirnoff
Dream on little broomstick cowboy.
Smirnoff
Sure and at one time people stored them in glass display cases and one over
their fireplace. This is not 1976 and more children are killed by a gun nut
grandfather that didn't lock his up where is belongs.
Smirnoff
> By the way Obama was anti-gun in 1996, since then he has flopped on
> you.
>
>
> I own a gun and feel I am not a coward. I own a competitive shotgun
> for shooting sporting clays & skeet.
>
> If you feel guns are wrong that is your option and your right. I do
> not feel that all people should handle guns either. I have been
> trained and get retrained often.
>
> Run a search for a city in Georgia where guns were required. Then run
> a search for a city, I think it was in NC, where guns were banned.
> Then compare the 0% crime rate (not including misdemeanors - they
> still had some speeding) to over 60% (been a few years I want to say
> higher but not sure.)
>
> If someone is willing to kill someone, what makes you think they will
> abide by a gun ban? If that happened only criminals would have a gun.
> Even if you got rid of all guns, there are still killings with knifes,
> bats, rope, pencils, automobiles...
I said "Most gun owner are fools" which is the case. The ones that think
they will use it to successfully continue to defend their life and property.
I don't care if there is a gun ban or not. I don't care what politician
flipped on that issue. Romney if the biggest flipper so don't think you win
some points bringing up Obama. With more cars on the roads there will be
more car deaths. The same with guns. Simple concept. There are far to many
gun crimes that result in the use by someone that was irresponsible and
allowed their weapons to get into the hands of someone else. If guns were
used properly then most of the gun crimes and accidents would never happen.
Gun nuts want one under their pillow instead of locked up where it belongs.
Scout
> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>> By the way Obama was anti-gun in 1996, since then he has flopped on
>> you.
>>
>>
>> I own a gun and feel I am not a coward. I own a competitive shotgun
>> for shooting sporting clays & skeet.
>>
>> If you feel guns are wrong that is your option and your right. I do
>> not feel that all people should handle guns either. I have been
>> trained and get retrained often.
>>
>> Run a search for a city in Georgia where guns were required. Then run
>> a search for a city, I think it was in NC, where guns were banned.
>> Then compare the 0% crime rate (not including misdemeanors - they
>> still had some speeding) to over 60% (been a few years I want to say
>> higher but not sure.)
>>
>> If someone is willing to kill someone, what makes you think they will
>> abide by a gun ban? If that happened only criminals would have a gun.
>> Even if you got rid of all guns, there are still killings with knifes,
>> bats, rope, pencils, automobiles...
>
> I said "Most gun owner are fools" which is the case. The ones that think
> they will use it to successfully continue to defend their life and
> property.
Count me as a fool then, but given I have already done so, it certainly
seems to work.
Scout
Cite.
Smirnoff
Cite WHAT? Cite that gun owners at one time kept them in simple glass gun
cases or they used to keep them over their fireplace? Maybe you never heard
some kid getting a gun from some place their grandfather kept it that was
not secure.
Please get a clue. This week in Boston over 60 criminals were arrested in
an operation to specifically net them. Of all these people there was a total
of 4 guns confiscated. The facts are the criminals are keep better track of
their illegal guns than the gun nuts that feel they need them for some lame
brain reason. If the legal gun owners were as protective of their guns there
would be no gun crimes to begin with.
Smirnoff
Wahahaha........How does it work? Do you show it to all the bad guys? You
actually think it makes you safer don't you? Wahahahaha...............
"booboo £ ¥ 0/00 :)"
Only my cold dead hands will give up my guns.
Scout
> Scout wrote:
>> "Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
>> news:WbFkj.740$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
>>> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>>>> Kennesaw, Georgia was the city that required guns.
>>>>
>>>> one of a few citys that banned pistol was Washington, D.C.; see
>>>> below; "Before the District banned handguns in 1976, the murder
>>>> rate had been declining. But soon afterward, the rate climbed to
>>>> the highest of all large U.S. cities. It also rose relative to
>>>> nearby Maryland and Virginia as well as relative to other cities
>>>> with more than 500,000 people. During the 31-year life of the ban,
>>>> with the exception of a few years during which the city's murder
>>>> rate ranked second or third, there have been more killings per
>>>> capita in Washington, D.C. than in any other major city."
>>>> http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8717
>>>
>>> Sure and at one time people stored them in glass display cases and
>>> one over their fireplace. This is not 1976 and more children are
>>> killed by a gun nut grandfather that didn't lock his up where is
>>> belongs.
>>
>> Cite.
>
> Cite WHAT? Cite that gun owners at one time kept them in simple glass gun
> cases or they used to keep them over their fireplace? Maybe you never
> heard some kid getting a gun from some place their grandfather kept it
> that was not secure.
The last. If it's as common as you claim then you should be able to readily
supply me with a whole list of such instances. I simply note that gun
accidents are at an all time low in total number and that is a continueing
trend. It's even lower if you consider rates since the population has
expanded as well.
> Please get a clue. This week in Boston over 60 criminals were arrested in
> an operation to specifically net them. Of all these people there was a
> total of 4 guns confiscated. The facts are the criminals are keep better
> track of their illegal guns than the gun nuts that feel they need them for
> some lame brain reason.
Right, 60 criminals and only 4 knew where their guns were?
Sorry, but I think you're just making up these "facts" as you go.
> If the legal gun owners were as protective of their guns there would be no
> gun crimes to begin with.
In what way? Do I have any control over what a criminal does? Do you? Does
anyone, other than the criminal themselves?
How exactly do you think legal gun owners can stop all gun crime? Be
specific and exact.
Scout
Quite well, thank you.
> Do you show it to all the bad guys?
Just the ones threatening me.
> You actually think it makes you safer don't you? Wahahahaha...............
I know it does. That knife wasn't put away because I'm such a nice fellow
that the criminal changed his mind about pulling a knife on me.
Further, even the Justice Department says so.
"A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm
suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended
themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon. "
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief
Guns and Crime: Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self-Defense, and
Firearm Theft
Bill DeFranzo
>> Cite.
>
> Cite WHAT? Cite that gun owners at one time kept them in simple glass gun
> cases or they used to keep them over their fireplace? Maybe you never
> heard some kid getting a gun from some place their grandfather kept it
> that was not secure.
>
> Please get a clue. This week in Boston over 60 criminals were arrested in
> an operation to specifically net them. Of all these people there was a
> total of 4 guns confiscated. The facts are the criminals are keep better
> track of their illegal guns than the gun nuts that feel they need them for
> some lame brain reason. If the legal gun owners were as protective of
> their guns there would be no gun crimes to begin with.
>
a firearm. Their mayor pretends to be serious about crime but if that is
true then some people should be doing time for possessing those confiscated
guns. Find any news article or statistic that suggests that the law is being
enforced in the past or will be enforced now.
What scares me about postings from "gun grabbers" is their level of
ignorance. It is so easy to replace "all guns" with "all Blacks" or "all
woman" in most of their postings. It reinforces the notion that prejudice
springs from ignorance. Ironically, the issue centers around the Bill of
Rights not the guns. One does not need to be a gun nut to have an
intelligent opinion about the 2nd Amendment. It almost makes no sense to
respond to most postings from people who "feel" negatively toward all guns.
They have a problem.
Bill DeFranzo
"Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
news:WbFkj.739$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
>> By the way Obama was anti-gun in 1996, since then he has flopped on
>> you.
>>
>>
>> I own a gun and feel I am not a coward. I own a competitive shotgun
>> for shooting sporting clays & skeet.
>>
>> If you feel guns are wrong that is your option and your right. I do
>> not feel that all people should handle guns either. I have been
>> trained and get retrained often.
>>
>> Run a search for a city in Georgia where guns were required. Then run
>> a search for a city, I think it was in NC, where guns were banned.
>> Then compare the 0% crime rate (not including misdemeanors - they
>> still had some speeding) to over 60% (been a few years I want to say
>> higher but not sure.)
>>
>> If someone is willing to kill someone, what makes you think they will
>> abide by a gun ban? If that happened only criminals would have a gun.
>> Even if you got rid of all guns, there are still killings with knifes,
>> bats, rope, pencils, automobiles...
>
> I said "Most gun owner are fools" which is the case. The ones that think
> they will use it to successfully continue to defend their life and
> property. I don't care if there is a gun ban or not. I don't care what
> politician flipped on that issue. Romney if the biggest flipper so don't
> think you win some points bringing up Obama. With more cars on the roads
> there will be more car deaths. The same with guns. Simple concept.
Correction, "you meant to say "simplistic" concept. You are comparing all
cars on the road to guns used illegally, I believe. Correct?
The real fools are those people with smoke detectors and fire insurance. The
odds are in one's favor to never need either.
Michael Ejercito
Michael
SaPeIsMa
> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>
> Sure and at one time people stored them in glass display cases and one
> over their fireplace. This is not 1976 and more children are killed by a
> gun nut grandfather that didn't lock his up where is belongs.
>
And surely you can back up that claim with some EVIDENCE.....
Oh wait
What am I saying ?
I'm expecting a hoplophobe to back up his claims
SaPeIsMa
1) So how do you explain the continued rise in gun-ownership in the US
and the falling crime rates during the same period ?
Oh wait, you don't bother with facts when they go against your pet
bigotry
2) A gun locked up in a safe is of no use to anyone
Particularly NOT when some burglar breaks into your home at night
while you're sleeping
What are you going to do ?
Say to the burglar:
"Wait a sec while I get my gun out of the safe ?"
SaPeIsMa
Well, in my case, it sure made a couple of dudes who had no other reason to
approach me back off real quick
And when one of the said:
"Wait !
He's got a gun !
Let's get out of here !"
Was a pretty good clue as to what their intentions had been till they saw me
pull the gun and hold it next to my leg.
So yeah, my gun actually made me safer
I prevented me being listed as the victim of a mugging in a parking ramp
SaPeIsMa
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:CoIkj.1114$pC5.473@trnddc05...
Hear, hear !
Unknown
wrote:
>> Cite.
>
>Cite WHAT? Cite that gun owners at one time kept them in simple glass gun
>cases or they used to keep them over their fireplace? Maybe you never heard
>some kid getting a gun from some place their grandfather kept it that was
>not secure.
Tell you what nutter, why don't you put a sign on your apartment door
that says "NO GUNS HERE"?
Smirnoff
You have a need to do this regularly?
>
>> You actually think it makes you safer don't you?
>> Wahahahaha...............
>
> I know it does. That knife wasn't put away because I'm such a nice
> fellow that the criminal changed his mind about pulling a knife on me.
Move out of that slum.
Smirnoff
Wahahahaha.....................
Smirnoff
You can believe whatever you want. If you think more guns make a safer
society then you are one of those gun nuts. I take into consideration there
was a Charles Bronson Mini-series of Death Wish over the weekend and
accounts for all the loons posting.
SaPeIsMa
The only one confusing reality with movies is you
And then you're stupid enough to project that nonsense AKA shit on others
Feel free to demonstrate that less guns make a society safer
But before you do, have a look a countries like Mexico, Jamaica, Russia, and
more recently England and Australia which have all had different levels of
gun-control, ALL much more stringent than the US
In Mexico and Jamaica, crime and homicide are rampant and far greater than
in well-armed countries like the US, Switzerland and Finland
In Russia, over the previous century, over 60+ MILLION people have been
killed by their government, because they were defenseless against the
ravages of government thugs and goons. And the Russian crime rates, during
and following the Soviet was nothing to brag about for all that
And let's not forget the recent reports of the CDC (Center for Disease
Control) and the NAS (National Academy of Science) which have independently
come to the conclusion based on all the evidence currently available that
gun-control has NO CAUSAL effect on reducing crime rates.
Unlike you, I prefer to base my opinion on SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH and EVIDENCE,
and not some simplistic assumption that something that sounds good has got
to be true
zzbu...@netscape.net
> SaPeIsMa wrote:
> > "Smirnoff" <Unli...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
> >news:WbFkj.739$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
Well, not really. Since the only thing most anti-guns wanks in the
idiot US know about either guns, or Charles Bronson movies
is the movie The Godfather. Since they are MORONS.
>
> - Show quoted text -
mat...@lwssc.com
I showed you a city with high volume of gun ownership and almost 0
crime rate. I also showed you a city with a pistol ban and it was
almost always the highest crime rate in our nation. How do you respond
to that, is it a fluke?
I can repost the information again if you like, but I figured you were
ignoring it since there isnt a responce that would support your views.
My guns stay locked up except the one beside my bed at night. I have
no children, myself and my wife are trained. When we are not home it
is locked before we leave, how is this not safe?
Scout
Na, actually it's pretty rare, but once without adequate defense is enough
to leave me dead. So why should I ignore that possibility?
>>> You actually think it makes you safer don't you?
>>> Wahahahaha...............
>>
>> I know it does. That knife wasn't put away because I'm such a nice
>> fellow that the criminal changed his mind about pulling a knife on me.
>
> Move out of that slum.
Actually, the place it occured wasn't a slum, it was actually a very nice
high end neighborhood in northern Virginia. In case, you missed it, crime
isn't limited to slums.
Scout
Well given the violent crime rates that existed prior to guns. I think it's
safe to say that guns have made society a lot safer. It's also allowed us
considerably more freedom that even before in human history. Now if you
prefer to live in the Dark Ages where might made right and the fruits of
your labor belonged to your lord and master, then by all mean immigrate to
certain highly oppressive 3rd world nations and you too can enjoy the
benefits of what a disarmed society can be.
Unknown
wrote:
> You can believe whatever you want. If you think more guns make a safer
>society then you are one of those gun nuts. I take into consideration there
>was a Charles Bronson Mini-series of Death Wish over the weekend and
>accounts for all the loons posting.
>
No problem. You want to depend on the good nanny state showing up to
save your ass, go ahead. "When seconds count, 911 is only
minutes/hours/days away". Just stop trying to take/tax my guns.
Wayne
"n...@gntbcr.com" <Not PC> wrote in message
news:trjap3pu4dtenlch3...@4ax.com...
For the anti gunners, the democratic race is getting confusing.
Ex-presidents tend to keep a relatively low profile during selection of
nominees. But in this case, is Obama running aginst B. J. Clinton, or is he
running aginst Hillary, or do B.J. and Hillary plan to share the office on a
rotating basis so that B.J. can truthfully say that he didn't have 3
terms...only 2.5 terms.
(remember your ABCs....Anybody But Clinton)
Smirnoff
Ya, I know. Only stupid criminals, drug people mostly, do their thing in
their own hood. The smart ones take it to where the money is and rarely
allow anyone to get the best of them gun owners or otherwise. I am not
trying to harass anyone but I do have fun with the real gun nuts.
Smirnoff
The only science that is real is the one that applies to the individual and
where THEY live. I live in a safe area that has low crime and there is no
need to have fantasies about using a gun to protect against a crime that is
unlikely to occur. I recently saw a teen defend himself with a bat and a
lady that kicked ass because she had a black belt. These are the facts I
deal with. The only time I had been approached by someone with a knife I
didn't need a gun to scare him away. But then I think some are just born
victims.
Scout
and who exactly are "the real gun nuts"?
Smirnoff
> Smirnoff,
> I showed you a city with high volume of gun ownership and almost 0
> crime rate. I also showed you a city with a pistol ban and it was
> almost always the highest crime rate in our nation. How do you respond
> to that, is it a fluke?
Could be. You read this and more regarding the same and get back to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://timlambert.org/guns/lott/
Do more guns cause less crime?
Tim Lambert
The main argument of a recent book by John Lott is summarized in the title:
More Guns, Less Crime [26]. There are three parts to this argument:
1.. that there were more guns
2.. that there was less crime
3.. that more guns caused less crime
Lott's argument depends on all three parts being true. If any one of the
parts is incorrect, the entire argument fails. In fact, as I will show in
the next three sections of this document, all three parts are wrong:
1.. there weren't significantly more guns
2.. it is unclear whether there was less crime
3.. even if there was more guns and less crime, more guns did not cause
less crime
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There ALL kinds of data and stories. You pick the ones YOU like.
> I can repost the information again if you like, but I figured you were
> ignoring it since there isnt a responce that would support your views.
>
> My guns stay locked up except the one beside my bed at night. I have
> no children, myself and my wife are trained. When we are not home it
> is locked before we leave, how is this not safe?
I never said it was not safe. Do you think you are like all gun owners? If
you were there would never be a gun that got in the hands of a criminal then
would there?
Scout
The same can be said about house fires, but oddly enough many homes each
year are lost due to unlikely and unforeseen fires.
Shall we eliminate fire extinguishers, smoke detectors and fire insurance
because the chance of a house fire occurring to a particular individual is
rare?
Smirnoff
hey? You sound like a gun nut to me. A stupid one to boot but most gun nuts
are.
Smirnoff
I said I don't care one way or the other if you or any responsible gun
owner has as many as he likes. You are ASSUMING I am someone that wants to
disarm everyone. I owned guns when I was in my 20's and first out of the
service but that fun wore off and I don't feel any need to have one. I know
many people that no longer play with toys like trains and trucks.
Smirnoff
Where did I say I was trying to take away guns? You seem to be one of those
paranoid gun nuts to me. Can't have an intelligent conversation unless you
lock and load, hey?
Smirnoff
I bet you are real proud of your drunken VP that shot someone in the face.
Wahahahaha.............
Scout
> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>> Smirnoff,
>> I showed you a city with high volume of gun ownership and almost 0
>> crime rate. I also showed you a city with a pistol ban and it was
>> almost always the highest crime rate in our nation. How do you respond
>> to that, is it a fluke?
>
> Could be. You read this and more regarding the same and get back to me.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> http://timlambert.org/guns/lott/
>
> Do more guns cause less crime?
> Tim Lambert
>
> The main argument of a recent book by John Lott is summarized in the
> title: More Guns, Less Crime [26]. There are three parts to this argument:
> 1.. that there were more guns
> 2.. that there was less crime
> 3.. that more guns caused less crime
Your argument depends on your getting his arguments right. Since you
haven't, your analysis fails before it even gets started.
Scout
I accept your admission you can't address the point made which shows anyone
who is a student of history is a "gun nut" by your definition.
Smirnoff
The ones that get pissed whenever someone thinks others want to disarm them
and remains clueless. Anyone that has an over active imagination and thinks
he is likely to actually get to use one on another person in a safe area.
The ones that insist on arming themselves when they go to the store for a
Sunday paper. I have seen posters say they don't go anywhere without being
armed. If you carry 100% of the time you are a bit of a gun nut, wouldn't
you say? There are many clues that give one away as being a gun nut. You
know them as well as anyone.
Scout
Since there is no such place as a "safe area" I guess that leaves me out.
> The ones that insist on arming themselves when they go to the store for a
> Sunday paper.
Oh? Crimes don't occur on Sundays?
>I have seen posters say they don't go anywhere without being armed.
If they chose to do so and it doesn't harm you, then who cares?
> If you carry 100% of the time you are a bit of a gun nut, wouldn't you
> say?
No. Because one never knows when violent crime is going to occur. People
have been killed at all times and in all places. So having defense isn't
something one should ignore if one is interested in protecting themselves
from violent crime.
> There are many clues that give one away as being a gun nut. You know them
> as well as anyone.
Yea, they question why people should have or carry guns.
Smirnoff
What did I say my analysis was? Do you even know? You are not doing to well
here. There is no proof that more guns make it any safer. You only want to
think they do. Have you actually done any reading beyond what you want to
think?
Smirnoff
You are making a fool of yourself. Show me where my definition translates
into this?
Put it here:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne
never presented a reasonable candidate for me to support, so I end up,
virtually always, voting republican. And sometimes, I have to hold my nose
while I vote. The sleazebag Clintons are the worst of the bunch, democrat
or republican. In a properly ordered world, they would be living in a
double-wide in Arkansas.
Smirnoff
So you admit that you pack every time you leave your room.
Wahahahaha.........Yup. Your a gun nut. Wahahahahaha............
Smirnoff
No one comes close to the lying chimp we have now. Even if Clinton did get
an on the job header. There is no one in the right that is any good either
so you rather go with someone that degrades the whole country and disgraces
America. Every recession has occurred with a republican and it has always
taken a Dem to bring the country back into the black. Must feel good to be
on the side of a party like the repugs.
Scout
Scout
I accept your admission that you are unable to read, comprehend and
understand the English language.
Unknown
wrote:
Lock and load my dick, fool.
Smirnoff
What kind of a nut ball are you? I understand that you think you can't
leave the house without trembling and therefor need to pack a firearm to
calm your inadequacies. What else is there to know about you? It must really
suck to be such a fearful little man. Good luck with that.
Smirnoff
You are truly a whack job gun nut. I feel very sorry for anyone that is
such a coward and needs a gun to make him feel like a man.
mat...@lwssc.com
armed versus unarmed city. If it doesnt work in our capital city how
would it work elsewhere?
Topp@Work
> So you admit that you pack every time you leave your room.
> Wahahahaha.........Yup. Your a gun nut. Wahahahahaha............
So, I guess all L.E.O. personnell are too since they are REQUIRED by FEDERAL
LAW
to CARRY at ALL TIMES
RD (The Sandman)
news:RYGdndwKgfnLdAXa...@giganews.com:
Is that a new 9/11 thingy?
--
RD (The Sandman)
War is absolute hell.....but to give in
to terrorism is much, much worse
Smirnoff
Completely different from the NutJob that thinks it is "normal" behavior to
feel the need to be armed to protect themselves from the boogie man. If you
can't live without a life of terror and fear then why not just put it to
your pathetic head and pull the trigger right now?
Man it must really suck being you. You can't even go out for the Sunday
paper without trembling thinking someone might be there to kill you. Why
don't you just grow some balls and take life for what it is like most of the
rest and stop shaking in your boots.
Smirnoff
Like I said if you life in that slum them get a job and move. Beats pissing
your pants each time you go out to check the mail.
Read something other than what you loons post to each other and get an
education.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w7967
Try google if you have the balls.
http://www.vpc.org/studies/ltk4one.htm
There are approximately as many guns in civilian hands in the United States
as there are people, more than 250 million (Kleck, pp. 96-97). Most are
rifles and shotguns used primarily for recreation, but a growing proportion,
perhaps one-third, are handguns, which are usually purchased for personal or
home defense. Between the late 1960s and late 1970s, violent crime rates in
the United States increased very rapidly. The robbery rate increased nearly
six-fold, and the murder rate nearly doubled, peaking at about 10 in 100,000
in 1979 (Polsby). During this same period, the American public rapidly
acquired an inventory of tens of millions of new handguns, as well as even
more rifles and shotguns. Many opinion leaders blamed the escalating rates
of violent crime on the increased private ownership of firearms, and
proposed various kinds of gun control laws to deal with the problem.
More Guns does not mean less crime.
Smirnoff
You are the only fool in this conversation. A very scared little man/boy.
Good luck with that.
Big_I
everyone has the right to defend themselves.
As a youngster I went hunting about 2 times with my dad. I was in the
USAF for 4 yrs so a weapon was necessary. That is my gun history.
When I think of gun control, I think of Nazi Germany and the gas
chambers.
I will not ever let this happen to me or my family. I will get a gun
first.
Ira
Morton Davis
>>>>>>> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> By the way Obama was anti-gun in 1996, since then he has flopped
>>>>>>>> on you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I own a gun and feel I am not a coward. I own a competitive
>>>>>>>> shotgun for shooting sporting clays & skeet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you feel guns are wrong that is your option and your right. I
>>>>>>>> do not feel that all people should handle guns either. I have
>>>>>>>> been trained and get retrained often.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Run a search for a city in Georgia where guns were required.
>>>>>>>> Then run a search for a city, I think it was in NC, where guns
>>>>>>>> were banned. Then compare the 0% crime rate (not including
>>>>>>>> misdemeanors - they still had some speeding) to over 60% (been
>>>>>>>> a few years I want to say higher but not sure.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If someone is willing to kill someone, what makes you think they
>>>>>>>> will abide by a gun ban? If that happened only criminals would
>>>>>>>> have a gun. Even if you got rid of all guns, there are still
>>>>>>>> killings with knifes, bats, rope, pencils, automobiles...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I said "Most gun owner are fools" which is the case. The ones
>>>>>>> that think they will use it to successfully continue to defend
>>>>>>> their life and property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> certainly seems to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wahahaha........How does it work?
>>>>
>>>> Quite well, thank you.
>>>>
>>>>> Do you show it to all the bad guys?
>>>>
>>>> Just the ones threatening me.
>>>
>>> You have a need to do this regularly?
>>
>> Na, actually it's pretty rare, but once without adequate defense is
>> enough to leave me dead. So why should I ignore that possibility?
>>
>>
>>>>> You actually think it makes you safer don't you?
>>>>> Wahahahaha...............
>>>>
>>>> I know it does. That knife wasn't put away because I'm such a nice
>>>> fellow that the criminal changed his mind about pulling a knife on
>>>> me.
>>>
>>> Move out of that slum.
>>
>> Actually, the place it occured wasn't a slum, it was actually a very
>> nice high end neighborhood in northern Virginia. In case, you missed
>> it, crime isn't limited to slums.
>>
>
> Ya, I know. Only stupid criminals, drug people mostly, do their thing in
> their own hood. The smart ones take it to where the money is and rarely
> allow anyone to get the best of them gun owners or otherwise. I am not
> trying to harass anyone but I do have fun with the real gun nuts.
>
SaPeIsMa
"Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
news:lLtlj.772$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
>>
> their own hood. The smart ones take it to where the money is and rarely
> allow anyone to get the best of them gun owners or otherwise. I am not
> trying to harass anyone but I do have fun with the real gun nuts.
>
>
Why do you need to play with yourself in public ?
SaPeIsMa
>>>>> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>>>>>> By the way Obama was anti-gun in 1996, since then he has flopped
>>>>>> on you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I own a gun and feel I am not a coward. I own a competitive
>>>>>> shotgun for shooting sporting clays & skeet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you feel guns are wrong that is your option and your right. I
>>>>>> do not feel that all people should handle guns either. I have been
>>>>>> trained and get retrained often.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Run a search for a city in Georgia where guns were required. Then
>>>>>> run a search for a city, I think it was in NC, where guns were
>>>>>> banned. Then compare the 0% crime rate (not including misdemeanors
>>>>>> - they still had some speeding) to over 60% (been a few years I
>>>>>> want to say higher but not sure.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If someone is willing to kill someone, what makes you think they
>>>>>> will abide by a gun ban? If that happened only criminals would
>>>>>> have a gun. Even if you got rid of all guns, there are still
>>>>>> killings with knifes, bats, rope, pencils, automobiles...
>>>>>
>>>>> I said "Most gun owner are fools" which is the case. The ones that
>>>>> think they will use it to successfully continue to defend their
>>>>> don't care what politician flipped on that issue. Romney if the
>>>>> biggest flipper so don't think you win some points bringing up
>>>>> Obama. With more cars on the roads there will be more car deaths.
>>>>> The same with guns. Simple concept. There are far to many gun
>>>>> crimes that result in the use by someone that was irresponsible
>>>>> and allowed their weapons to get into the hands of someone else.
>>>>> If guns were used properly then most of the gun crimes and
>>>>> accidents would never happen. Gun nuts want one under their pillow
>>>>> instead of locked up where it belongs.
>>>>
>>>> 1) So how do you explain the continued rise in gun-ownership in
>>>> the US and the falling crime rates during the same period ?
>>>> Oh wait, you don't bother with facts when they go against
>>>> your pet bigotry
>>>> 2) A gun locked up in a safe is of no use to anyone
>>>> Particularly NOT when some burglar breaks into your home at
>>>> night while you're sleeping
>>>> What are you going to do ?
>>>> Say to the burglar:
>>>> "Wait a sec while I get my gun out of the safe ?"
>>>
>>> safer society then you are one of those gun nuts. I take into
>>> consideration there was a Charles Bronson Mini-series of Death Wish
>>> over the weekend and accounts for all the loons posting.
>>
>> And then you're stupid enough to project that nonsense AKA shit on
>> others Feel free to demonstrate that less guns make a society safer
>> But before you do, have a look a countries like Mexico, Jamaica,
>> Russia, and more recently England and Australia which have all had
>> different levels of gun-control, ALL much more stringent than the US
>> In Mexico and Jamaica, crime and homicide are rampant and far greater
>> than in well-armed countries like the US, Switzerland and Finland
>> In Russia, over the previous century, over 60+ MILLION people have
>> been killed by their government, because they were defenseless
>> against the ravages of government thugs and goons. And the Russian
>> crime rates, during and following the Soviet was nothing to brag
>> about for all that
>> And let's not forget the recent reports of the CDC (Center for Disease
>> Control) and the NAS (National Academy of Science) which have
>> independently come to the conclusion based on all the evidence
>> currently available that gun-control has NO CAUSAL effect on reducing
>> crime rates.
>> Unlike you, I prefer to base my opinion on SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH and
>> EVIDENCE, and not some simplistic assumption that something that
>> sounds good has got to be true
>
> The only science that is real is the one that applies to the individual
> and where THEY live.
Clearly you know NOTHING about science
> I live in a safe area that has low crime and there is no need to have
> fantasies about using a gun to protect against a crime that is unlikely to
> occur.
Feel free to believe what you will
But just because you live in a "low-crime area" does not give you some sort
of magical immunity from being a victim
It just reduces your likelyhood of being one
As to fantasies
You're the one projecting YOUR fantasies around here
> I recently saw a teen defend himself with a bat and a lady that kicked ass
> because she had a black belt.
Well that's nice
So what ?
I've spent nearly 40 years practising a variety of martial arts
I've also had occasion to apply that knowledge in defense of self and others
But that knowleged does not make me stupid enough to ignore a tool that
gives me a HUGE advantage as I'm getting older and slower
> These are the facts I deal with.
You wouldn't recognize a "fact" if it bit you in the nose
At best you confuse your prejudice with fact and work to the rule
"This is the conclusion on which I base my facts.."
And it's perfectly evident with the "arguments you present
>The only time I had been approached by someone with a knife I didn't need a
>gun to scare him away. But then I think some are just born victims.
>
And you were just born lucky and stupid
So what ?
SaPeIsMa
Funny
But every time I drive my car, I have my license and proof of insurance
Does that make me a "car nut" ?
I'd more than happy to be called a "gun nut" by an idiot, than to be
considered an idiot like you
By the way, there is no such thing as a "safe area"
That's another one of those stupid claims that you make
At best, you can claim that one area is safer than another
SaPeIsMa
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:qlulj.16736$LN4.12030@trnddc07...
Not to mention churches, like it happened in Colorado so recently....
<snicker>
>>I have seen posters say they don't go anywhere without being armed.
>
> If they chose to do so and it doesn't harm you, then who cares?
>
The paranoid "gun nuts" like smirnif here who are afraid of the wrong people
SaPeIsMa
Isn't it funny when the gun nuts project all kinds of psychiatric issues on
those who choose to follow Lord Baden-Powell's famous motto "Be Prepared" ?
Oh wait, that's the Motto of the Boy Scouts he founded
By the way, smirny, after about 40 years of martial arts, I could probably
wipe the floor with your punk ass without breaking a sweat.
That is if I choose not to shoot you first, were I to consider you a
threat
You see, a smart man has MANY skills to his "quiver"
An idiot (thas' you dummy) has few if none
Smirnoff
Wahahaha...........Dream on little man....Wahahahahaha.................
Smirnoff
You seem to be getting delirious. YOU are the paranoid gun nut not me.
Smirnoff
No little man. You are the idiot. I am the normal one that doesn't feel
terror to face the world without my security blanket.
Smirnoff
Man you have flipped. Now you are turn perv on us. If that gun your
fallace? Do guns make you this way?
Smirnoff
I was also in the Air Force and feel the same way about gun control. I have
said I don't care who has a gun or not. I just like to harass the real gun
nuts that somehow think carrying one every where is going to make them
safer. I say it does not. If someone wants to rob you and pulls out a gun
there is nothing you can do. These gun nuts see it differently. They think
they will be the one in the mall that gets so shoot the bad guy. The only
way a gun owner will win is like already described earlier in this thread.
The other guy has a knife. These guys are whacked and obviously dream about
being a hero that gets to shoot someone defending themselves. I don't even
think about it so in the eyes of these nut jobs I will somehow be attacked
because I don't carry a gun. The screwed up mind of gun nuts always say
this.
Smirnoff
And what would THEY be? I am the normal one. YOU are the nut that feel the
need to pack a firearm every time he goes out to check the mail.
>
>
>> I recently saw a teen defend himself with a bat and a lady that
>> kicked ass because she had a black belt.
>
> Well that's nice
> So what ?
See. You are not entertained unless it includes you or some other nut that
is involved with a gun scenario.
> I've spent nearly 40 years practising a variety of martial arts
> I've also had occasion to apply that knowledge in defense of self and
> others But that knowleged does not make me stupid enough to ignore a
> tool that gives me a HUGE advantage as I'm getting older and slower
And this is what makes you pack every time you leave your home?
>
>
>
>> These are the facts I deal with.
>
> You wouldn't recognize a "fact" if it bit you in the nose
> At best you confuse your prejudice with fact and work to the rule
> "This is the conclusion on which I base my facts.."
> And it's perfectly evident with the "arguments you present
What prejudice is that? It is not hard to recognize a gun nut and poke fun
at him. You see facts in a very slanted view as we all can see. If your
little hole is unsafe them move. Don't try to say it is like D.C. or some
other crime infested area. People in safe areas do not go around armed like
you seem to be fixated on. I work in a place that has 500 people and I bet
not one of them carries a gun to work. Are they all crazy and you think they
should all pack a firearm? Man you are one nut job, that's for sure.
SaPeIsMa
LOL
You should go re-read Freud
The ones afraid of inanimate objects LIKE GUNS, or the ones that believe
that having a guns makes you a coward and gives you manhood issues, are the
ones who are the ones with the issues
Oh wait, that just described you
SaPeIsMa
That's nice
So what ?
SaPeIsMa
You like projecting that others are scared or cowards or have manhood issues
Why is that ?
Do you think that would make your problems more bearable if you believe that
others suffer from them too ?
SaPeIsMa
Too bad you're too ignorant, or stupid, or both to NOT understand the
concept that "Correlation does NOT make CAUSATION"
The most important factor for crime in the 60s and 70s was that the baby
boomers were at the apex of their curve and becoming young adults
That criteria HAS been shown to be CAUSAL
The other interesting problem with your stats is that the late gun-control
really starting taking off. See Washington D.C. and it's attempt at
gun-control as a case in point.As gun-control increased, so did crime.
That's how Washington D.C. became the crime and homicide capital of the
country
And then let's nor forget that your source, has consistently ignored the
results of the Fraser Institute of Canada, the CDC (Center for Disease
Control) and the NAS (National Academy of Science), which have INDEPENDENTLY
reviewed the statistical data available and have concluded that there is NO
Correlation between gun-control and REDUCTION or INCREASE of crime
In other words gun-control does NOT work
But hey, don't let me piss on your parade of ignorance
SaPeIsMa
>>> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>>>> Smirnoff,
>>>> I showed you a city with high volume of gun ownership and almost 0
>>>> crime rate. I also showed you a city with a pistol ban and it was
>>>> almost always the highest crime rate in our nation. How do you
>>>> respond to that, is it a fluke?
>>>
>>> Could be. You read this and more regarding the same and get back to
>>> me.
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> http://timlambert.org/guns/lott/ Do more guns cause less crime?
>>> Tim Lambert
>>>
>>> The main argument of a recent book by John Lott is summarized in the
>>> title: More Guns, Less Crime [26]. There are three parts to this
>>> argument: 1.. that there were more guns
>>> 2.. that there was less crime
>>> 3.. that more guns caused less crime
>>
>> Your argument depends on your getting his arguments right. Since you
>> haven't, your analysis fails before it even gets started.
>
> What did I say my analysis was? Do you even know? You are not doing to
> well here. There is no proof that more guns make it any safer. You only
> want to think they do. Have you actually done any reading beyond what you
> want to think?
>
Lott not only demonstrated it. He supported it with data that has yet to be
proven incorrect
Which is far more than you or the sources you use can claim
SaPeIsMa
Are you able to translate the above drivel into readable English ?
SaPeIsMa
Shit, boy, why don't you get a job in a cinema
As a PROJECTOR
You are doing a FINE job of that here
At least that way, you'll actually get paid for the one thing you do
well
SaPeIsMa
Whatever
The very fact that you need to believe that
you are the "bigger man" because you are clueless,
that others are allegedly "terrorized" where you supposedly are not
demonstrates the opposite
SaPeIsMa
Normal, is a statistical definition that requires you to compare yourself to
the rest of the population
Now, you're nowhere NEAR the median of the population with the drivel
you post
You're much closer to the edge of la-la-land
As to checking the mail, unlike you who needs to walk from his trailer to
the mailbox on the side of the road, I have a mailbox right next to my door,
where the nice mailman delivers the mail 6 times a week.
>
>>
>>
>>> I recently saw a teen defend himself with a bat and a lady that
>>> kicked ass because she had a black belt.
>>
>> Well that's nice
>> So what ?
>
> See. You are not entertained unless it includes you or some other nut that
> is involved with a gun scenario.
>
So tell us, what is the sound of a concept that goes in one of your ears,
out the other, and never slows down in between for lack of anything to act
on it ?
>
>> I've spent nearly 40 years practising a variety of martial arts
>> I've also had occasion to apply that knowledge in defense of self and
>> others But that knowleged does not make me stupid enough to ignore a
>> tool that gives me a HUGE advantage as I'm getting older and slower
>
> And this is what makes you pack every time you leave your home?
>
That's a pretty good reason, sonny
It's one of the reasons, I studied martial arts.
To have an advantage IF EVER I ended up in a bad situation
Only an idiot, (thas' you dimbulb) would be stupid enough to NOT try to
stack the odds in his favor.
But hey, stupid is as stupid does, dummy
>>
>>
>>
>>> These are the facts I deal with.
>>
>> You wouldn't recognize a "fact" if it bit you in the nose
>> At best you confuse your prejudice with fact and work to the rule
>> "This is the conclusion on which I base my facts.."
>> And it's perfectly evident with the "arguments you present
>
> What prejudice is that? It is not hard to recognize a gun nut and poke fun
> at him. You see facts in a very slanted view as we all can see. If your
> little hole is unsafe them move. Don't try to say it is like D.C. or some
> other crime infested area. People in safe areas do not go around armed
> like you seem to be fixated on. I work in a place that has 500 people and
> I bet not one of them carries a gun to work. Are they all crazy and you
> think they should all pack a firearm? Man you are one nut job, that's for
> sure.
>
A lot of people in "safe areas" go around armed
In many cases, it's that fact that makes those areas SO MUCH SAFER
But don't let me get in the way of your stupid prejudices and bigotry
>>
>>
>>> The only time I had been approached by someone with a knife I didn't
>>> need a gun to scare him away. But then I think some are just born
>>> victims.
>>
>> And you were just born lucky and stupid
>> So what ?
>
>
I guess you were born stupid
And then your parents dropped you a few times to make sure
you poor thing
RD (The Sandman)
news:jbamj.810$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net:
> Topp@Work wrote:
>> "Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
>> news:%Sulj.783$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
>>
>>> So you admit that you pack every time you leave your room.
>>> Wahahahaha.........Yup. Your a gun nut. Wahahahahaha............
>>
>> So, I guess all L.E.O. personnell are too since they are REQUIRED by
>> FEDERAL LAW
>> to CARRY at ALL TIMES
>
> Completely different from the NutJob that thinks it is "normal"
> behavior to
> feel the need to be armed to protect themselves from the boogie man.
> If you can't live without a life of terror and fear then why not just
> put it to your pathetic head and pull the trigger right now?
I carry a gun but not through fear. It simply gives me an option you
don't have.
> Man it must really suck being you. You can't even go out for the
> Sunday
> paper without trembling thinking someone might be there to kill you.
> Why don't you just grow some balls and take life for what it is like
> most of the rest and stop shaking in your boots.
Or get your head out of your ass or your brother's long enough to look
around and see what may be going on.
--
RD (The Sandman)
War is absolute hell.....but to give in
to terrorism is much, much worse
RD (The Sandman)
news:jpamj.811$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net:
> mat...@lwssc.com wrote:
>> Smirnoff, I am still waiting on your responce to the crime rates in
>> an armed versus unarmed city. If it doesnt work in our capital city
>> how would it work elsewhere?
>
> Like I said if you life in that slum them get a job and move. Beats
> pissing
> your pants each time you go out to check the mail.
>
> Read something other than what you loons post to each other and get
> an
> education.
> http://www.nber.org/papers/w7967
>
> Try google if you have the balls.
>
> http://www.vpc.org/studies/ltk4one.htm
If this is where you get your information, no wonder you are fucked up.
> There are approximately as many guns in civilian hands in the United
> States as there are people, more than 250 million (Kleck, pp. 96-97).
> Most are rifles and shotguns used primarily for recreation, but a
> growing proportion, perhaps one-third, are handguns, which are usually
> purchased for personal or home defense. Between the late 1960s and
> late 1970s, violent crime rates in the United States increased very
> rapidly. The robbery rate increased nearly six-fold, and the murder
> rate nearly doubled, peaking at about 10 in 100,000 in 1979 (Polsby).
Yep, and all those crime rates are down now. Of course VPC won't tell you
that. Try looking at FBI stats or even looking at mortality tables. Here
are a couple of sources for you:
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/expanded_information/index.html
> During this same period, the American public rapidly acquired an
> inventory of tens of millions of new handguns, as well as even more
> rifles and shotguns. Many opinion leaders blamed the escalating rates
> of violent crime on the increased private ownership of firearms, and
> proposed various kinds of gun control laws to deal with the problem.
>
>
> More Guns does not mean less crime.
Nor does it mean more. Here is another cite for you:
http://www.garymauser.net/pdf/KatesMauserHJPP.pdf
There are also studies which look internationally at which nations have
high ownershp rates and high crime, low ownership rates and high crime,
high owership rates and low crime and low ownership rates and low crime.
There is no causal effect of gun ownership in either direction.
Smirnoff
You are the gun loon and you loons say I am a "gun nut". Little man you
are the one that is twisted. It doesn't take balls to carry around
something that makes you feel big.
Smirnoff
So you spend most of your time looking around for that boogieman hey? It
must really hurt to be as fearful as you gun loons. I bet you need one on
the night stand just to get some sleep. You loons are the ones with your
little heads planted and no one else. It's one thing to carry one when you
go out hunting or to the range but to pack every time you leave the house
and think those that don't are the odd ones just proves my point. Do you
dream of being the one that kills the guy at the mall or school that goes
nuts? I bet you get a woody just thinking about it. Your gun is you falace
obviously.
Smirnoff
You must be scared of something to make you feel you need to carry a gun
everywhere and think that those that don't tremble like you are the odd
ones. Why don't you tell us all about it. Maybe we can help you. You are
nuts to think you can identify the one that wants to shoot if there is such
a person. Tell me, what does he look like? Do you fantasize about shooting
the bad guys that you can pick out of a crowd? You are just not normal and
not the average citizen. You are clueless.
Smirnoff
> "Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
> news:j%dmj.817$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
>> SaPeIsMa wrote:
>>> "Smirnoff" <Unl...@unlisted.com> wrote in message
>>> news:lLtlj.772$lU5...@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
>>>>>
>>>> Ya, I know. Only stupid criminals, drug people mostly, do their
>>>> thing in their own hood. The smart ones take it to where the money
>>>> is and rarely allow anyone to get the best of them gun owners or
>>>> otherwise. I am not trying to harass anyone but I do have fun with
>>>> the real gun nuts.
>>>
>>> Why do you need to play with yourself in public ?
>>
>> Man you have flipped. Now you are turn perv on us. If that gun your
>> fallace? Do guns make you this way?
>>
>
> Are you able to translate the above drivel into readable English ?
Man you must be retarded. Read what you posted. You asked if I need to "play
with myself in public". Now if that isn't something that would come from a
pervert then you are sicker than I first thought. Tell us what you don't
get and we can go over it one more time loon.
Smirnoff
You just don't know how to read. I posted links to show that there is
evidence that shows otherwise but you are just dumb.
Smirnoff
Ya, I am the one that is stupid because I see you for the loon that you are.
You obviously can't understand an example when you read one. Tell me where
you go when you DON'T carry a gun with you? That mailman might have one in
his bag you know. Wahahahaha...........
Southern Democrat
Smirnoff
You are the one that is ignorant. You keep referring to DC like it is an
average American city. This shows how extreme you are. Look around bozo and
wake up from your dream world. There are just as many stats that show more
guns means more crime. You actually think that people have changed in a few
decades and now the gunners have made the world a safer place? Man you are
one out of balanced fool.