New Conneticut Gun laws////Ammo sales

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you can't name these 3500 individuals? The website you provided a link to, apparently can't ether. How very convenient.

Every "person" I randomly clicked on in your provided link, came up as 'unknown'. I gave up after clicking on about 10 of those supposed "people".

All I see in your link, is a phony organization, with an anti-constitutional rights agenda, using bogus facts to further their misguided cause.


Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...k_shooting.html
Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
We have a wee bit of fact to deal with. 3500 people have been killed since 12/14. How come? You know what with guns.


Okay, your assertion is that 3500 innocent people that were minding their own business, have been killed by someone else using a gun to kill them, since 12/14/12.

Lets see a full list of these 3500 individuals, complete with a link to their obituary.

Now don't go all ACORN on us, and use each individual name 72 times...
 
Originally Posted By: 02SE
So you can't name these 3500 individuals? The website you provided a link to, apparently can't ether. How very convenient.


So youre saying that they are lying? I dont trust those groups, but that is a pretty big charge to make without basis...

The first three random spots I clicked gave three names and cities, one in OK, one in MI and one in AL.

Im not saying youre wrong - these people likely do twist facts, as do most everyone on both sides of any big argument. But youre spewing speculation without basis.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
.... the FBI stolen gun stats. Because THOSE are the guns that are used in the crimes ......



Each of these stolen guns constitutes a crime, almost certainly a felony in any jurisdiction. And each owner was a victim of a crime.

So the solution to law abiding gun owners being victims of crime, is to get rid of law abiding gun owners?

That's punishing the victim.

All of these newly enacted and proposed laws that are aimed squarely at law abiding owners are really no different than the tactic of criminals putting their crime victims on trial.

It's sleazy in a courtroom, and it's even sleazier as a matter of public policy.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: 02SE
So you can't name these 3500 individuals? The website you provided a link to, apparently can't ether. How very convenient.


So youre saying that they are lying? I dont trust those groups, but that is a pretty big charge to make without basis...

The first three random spots I clicked gave three names and cities, one in OK, one in MI and one in AL.

Im not saying youre wrong - these people likely do twist facts, as do most everyone on both sides of any big argument. But youre spewing speculation without basis.


Really? My basis is based solely on what that site is putting out as fact.

I went through and just randomly clicked about 10 of the silhouetted "people". All of the ones I clicked came up as 'unknown'.

It would be a joke if it weren't so pathetic.

I guess their hope is that people will just see all of those silhouettes, and assume they represent real people without investigating further.

Claiming these supposed victims that they can't even identify, seems pretty blatantly dishonest to me.
 
So why has every one that Ive clicked upon had a name and location? Luck?

Implying that they are blatantly lying about this is a bit much even for me, who thinks that there are big conspiracies in many things.
 
Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
.... the FBI stolen gun stats. Because THOSE are the guns that are used in the crimes ......



Each of these stolen guns constitutes a crime, almost certainly a felony in any jurisdiction. And each owner was a victim of a crime.

So the solution to law abiding gun owners being victims of crime, is to get rid of law abiding gun owners?

That's punishing the victim.

All of these newly enacted and proposed laws that are aimed squarely at law abiding owners are really no different than the tactic of criminals putting their crime victims on trial.

It's sleazy in a courtroom, and it's even sleazier as a matter of public policy.


It is but you have to piece the parts together. Tons of easily accessible guns, we know that is the case because lots of people shoot themselves by accident each year. So obviously the right precautions arent being taken, especially when many are kids.

So easy access means that the "victim" is an enabler. My issue is that most do not even take "reasonable" precautions to secure these items, thus why so many are stolen.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
....
So easy access means that the "victim" is an enabler. My issue is that most do not even take "reasonable" precautions to secure these items, thus why so many are stolen.


But, isn't this assuming facts not in evidence?

If someone busts into my house, and busts into my residential security container, I'm pretty sure my guns are just going to be listed as stolen. There's not going to be any analysis of my responsibility, or lack thereof.

And what about the situation that Shannow posited, a couple of good cracks with an iron bar being persuasive enough to get the owner to open the safe. Those guns are just going to be listed as stolen.

Bottom line, all of those stolen guns are a crime. And we don't know anything about the responsibility, or lack thereof, of the owners.

I reject the notion that the solution to law abiding gun owners being victims of crime, is to get rid of law abiding gun owners.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So why has every one that Ive clicked upon had a name and location? Luck?


The odds are probably about the same as all of the ones I randomly clicked coming up as 'unknown'.

I went back and clicked on more, and some do have a name and location. The fact that they claim 'unknown' and unverifiable supposed victims, puts any and all of their claims into question, IMO.
 
Yes my friend as I said you did what I said you would do make up your own facts:phoney organization, anti constitutional rights agenda using bogus facts to further their misguided cause. Ok Bucko you prove any of this ok? I will wait for your reply.
smile.gif

Originally Posted By: 02SE
So you can't name these 3500 individuals? The website you provided a link to, apparently can't ether. How very convenient.

Every "person" I randomly clicked on in your provided link, came up as 'unknown'. I gave up after clicking on about 10 of those supposed "people".

All I see in your link, is a phony organization, with an anti-constitutional rights agenda, using bogus facts to further their misguided cause.


Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...k_shooting.html
Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
We have a wee bit of fact to deal with. 3500 people have been killed since 12/14. How come? You know what with guns.


Okay, your assertion is that 3500 innocent people that were minding their own business, have been killed by someone else using a gun to kill them, since 12/14/12.

Lets see a full list of these 3500 individuals, complete with a link to their obituary.

Now don't go all ACORN on us, and use each individual name 72 times...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Win

I reject the notion that the solution to law abiding gun owners being victims of crime, is to get rid of law abiding gun owners.


I agree 100%. But right now favoritism isnt on the side of the gun owners. And putting heads in the sand and just saying to buy more guns isnt a solution that helps anyone unfortunately.
 
Newsflash. There is a privacy law into affect. If you go into a hospital because you might be acting weird nobody can find that out thru the looney bin. Same holds you cannot get the names of those killed because you are on BITOG.They cannot put the names out so somebody on an motor oil website can find out. Man up and accept it. =02SE]
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So why has every one that Ive clicked upon had a name and location? Luck?


The odds are probably about the same as all of the ones I randomly clicked coming up as 'unknown'.

I went back and clicked on more, and some do have a name and location. The fact that they claim 'unknown' and unverifiable supposed victims, puts any and all of their claims into question, IMO.

[/quote]
 
I think this is a valid point.
smile.gif

Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
....
So easy access means that the "victim" is an enabler. My issue is that most do not even take "reasonable" precautions to secure these items, thus why so many are stolen.


But, isn't this assuming facts not in evidence?

If someone busts into my house, and busts into my residential security container, I'm pretty sure my guns are just going to be listed as stolen. There's not going to be any analysis of my responsibility, or lack thereof.

And what about the situation that Shannow posited, a couple of good cracks with an iron bar being persuasive enough to get the owner to open the safe. Those guns are just going to be listed as stolen.

Bottom line, all of those stolen guns are a crime. And we don't know anything about the responsibility, or lack thereof, of the owners.

I reject the notion that the solution to law abiding gun owners being victims of crime, is to get rid of law abiding gun owners.
 
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
Ok Bucko you prove any of this ok? I will wait for your reply.
smile.gif



Bucko? isn't resorting to name-calling frowned upon on this site? I think it might be against the rules.

People often resort to name-calling, when they can't prove their point.

Which I am still waiting for you to do.
 
No me lad it is the number what was the number?? Did you just see the figures?
crazy.gif
I have to be more careful when I suggest these links I guess.
Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: 02SE
So you can't name these 3500 individuals? The website you provided a link to, apparently can't ether. How very convenient.


So youre saying that they are lying? I dont trust those groups, but that is a pretty big charge to make without basis...

The first three random spots I clicked gave three names and cities, one in OK, one in MI and one in AL.

Im not saying youre wrong - these people likely do twist facts, as do most everyone on both sides of any big argument. But youre spewing speculation without basis.


Really? My basis is based solely on what that site is putting out as fact.

I went through and just randomly clicked about 10 of the silhouetted "people". All of the ones I clicked came up as 'unknown'.

It would be a joke if it weren't so pathetic.

I guess their hope is that people will just see all of those silhouettes, and assume they represent real people without investigating further.

Claiming these supposed victims that they can't even identify, seems pretty blatantly dishonest to me.
 
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No me lad it is the number what was the number?? Did you just see the figures?
crazy.gif
I have to be more careful when I suggest these links I guess.


Apparently you DO need to be more careful with the links you provide, to back up your claims.

You claimed 3500 people have been killed with guns since 12/14/12.

Even that website with it's numerous "unknown" victims being tallied, only claims 3293 killed as I type this. I don't know how your claims of 3500 killed, can be viewed as anything but false.

I would advise just sticking to verifiable facts, instead of apparently creating imaginary death-toll numbers out of thin air.

whistle.gif
 
If the car analogy does not seem suitable try tobacco.

Nobody "needs" tobacco products but they kill 400,000 + each year. Self harm? Suicide? What about the 49,000 that die each year from second hand smoke? That is murder!

It is easy to ban something you do not participate in... Try banning tobacco or booze to save "just one life".
 
The second hand smoke argument is questionable. Many other environmental factors come in to play in some of those situations. A robbery or stray bullet is somewhat different, and we have enacted laws to put secondhand smoke sources further away from others at buildings and whatnot, so there is some level of being proactive so the doer is isolated from the victim more. But your point is valid. When a parent smokes in a car with a five year old, is it different than Newtown? Well the kid isn't dead on the spot, so they disconnect. Plus the smoking folks will make their indications how smoking doesn't really cause cancer, so all is well... Dead on the spot is dead on the spot... So a little different, but a better analogy for sure.
 
Since that was published the new figure is 3500 I just cannot find it. Keep in mind the Syrians are watching this thread and we are giving them ideas on how to explain what is going on.You know this all about Firearms is one away from Humor.
Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No me lad it is the number what was the number?? Did you just see the figures?
crazy.gif
I have to be more careful when I suggest these links I guess.


Apparently you DO need to be more careful with the links you provide, to back up your claims.

You claimed 3500 people have been killed with guns since 12/14/12.

Even that website with it's numerous "unknown" victims being tallied, only claims 3293 killed as I type this. I don't know how your claims of 3500 killed, can be viewed as anything but false.

I would advise just sticking to verifiable facts, instead of apparently creating imaginary death-toll numbers out of thin air.

whistle.gif
 
Gosh you are right it is really 207 less. Chump Change. Why 3293 is nothing that can happen at a hockey game between the Islanders and the Rangers. You really cannot make this stuff up. Lets go back to 5-20 or 5-30 in Civic here in the US.
Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No me lad it is the number what was the number?? Did you just see the figures?
crazy.gif
I have to be more careful when I suggest these links I guess.


Apparently you DO need to be more careful with the links you provide, to back up your claims.

You claimed 3500 people have been killed with guns since 12/14/12.

Even that website with it's numerous "unknown" victims being tallied, only claims 3293 killed as I type this. I don't know how your claims of 3500 killed, can be viewed as anything but false.

I would advise just sticking to verifiable facts, instead of apparently creating imaginary death-toll numbers out of thin air.

whistle.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

john_pifer
New Shotgun Day - Mossberg 590A1 Retrograde!
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
20K
burbguy82
T
  • Locked
A letter from my congressman. An interesting read.
2
Replies
26
Views
8K
JHZR2
wwillson
  • Locked
Pennzoil Answers - Thinner Viscosity Grades
Replies
10
Views
20K
GaleHawkins
D
  • Locked
Exxon Mobil
Replies
19
Views
16K
MolaKule
D
  • Locked
Canada's Gun Registration Scheme
Replies
6
Views
2K
OffOrWFO
Back
Top Bottom