Another Nutter with a Gun

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score.

Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place.

It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread.

And your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone.

Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that?

(This is a repeat of a challenge I've made before when you have claimed the exact same thing. Of course, you never can provide such a link).

I tryed to find it. I admited that there are so many threads I gave up

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score.

Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place.

It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread.

And your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone.

Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that?

(This is a repeat of a challenge I've made before when you have claimed the exact same thing. Of course, you never can provide such a link).

I tryed to find it. I admited that there are so many threads I gave up

Interpretation - you can't find any.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

(kallend)Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that?

See immediately below.

Quote

A very good start would be to tighten existing rules so that people like Cho, already known to be a nutter, can't legally buy guns.

Then close obvious purchasing loopholes that allow anyone to avoid a NICS check if they want to.

Sounds like you don't support the existing laws as much as you SAY you do - but, of course, we already knew that.

Thank you for yet another strawman.

I guess you too are having a little comprehension problem today.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score.

Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place.

It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread.

And your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone.

Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that?

(This is a repeat of a challenge I've made before when you have claimed the exact same thing. Of course, you never can provide such a link).

I tryed to find it. I admited that there are so many threads I gave up

Interpretation - you can't find any.

No, its there and you know it so you post a lie here

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees.

So far, gun owners have stopped several loonies - unfortunately, AFTER they rampaged in the unarmed victim zones you endorse.

So you'd like a "future crime machine" so you can shoot the armed loonies before they commit any crime. I'd rather just keep loonies and guns separate.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Each year there are scores of people shot and killed by people with "a history of mental illness". Google those words and you'll see the score.

Your solution is to accept those homicides as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage, and to have enough armed people around to shoot and kill the loonies after they've started their killing sprees. My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place.

It seems that a fundamental difference between our approaches to life is revealed in this thread.

And your solution , as you have pontificated before, is to, for the most part, take guns away from everyone.

Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that?

(This is a repeat of a challenge I've made before when you have claimed the exact same thing. Of course, you never can provide such a link).

I tryed to find it. I admited that there are so many threads I gave up

Interpretation - you can't find any.

No, its there and you know it so you post a lie here

Interpretation - you have nothing to back your claim so you'll just repeat the claim anyway. Did you learn that trick from Josef Goebbels?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place.

Please describe to me a way to make it harder for the loonies and criminals to get guns that won't make it harder (or not as much harder) for the law abiding citizen to get guns?

--
Rob

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

--
Rob

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

My solution is to make it harder for loonies to get guns in the first place.

Please describe to me a way to make it harder for the loonies and criminals to get guns that won't make it harder (or not as much harder) for the law abiding citizen to get guns?

Are you placing your convenience above the lives of the 32 victims of Cho, who was a known nutcase but could still buy a gun legally because the current laws are toothless to the point of being totally useless?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

(kallend)Please provide a link to any post I've made where I have suggested that?

See immediately below.

Quote

A very good start would be to tighten existing rules so that people like Cho, already known to be a nutter, can't legally buy guns.

Then close obvious purchasing loopholes that allow anyone to avoid a NICS check if they want to.

Sounds like you don't support the existing laws as much as you SAY you do - but, of course, we already knew that.

Thank you for yet another strawman.

I guess you too are having a little comprehension problem today.

Hardly.

link

Quote

Where have I advocated for more restrictions? I'm asking that existing laws prohibiting criminals and loonies be effectively implemented.

Shall I provide more examples (other than already seen in this thread) to show your hypocrisy on the issue, or do you wish to concede the point?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

So you'd like a "future crime machine" so you can shoot the armed loonies before they commit any crime.

Care to show where I've said that, or do you just want to admit you're lying again about what I've said?

Your choice.

Quote

I'd rather just keep loonies and guns separate.

Best get working on that future crime machine, so we can tell when the loonies like your compatriot in collegia, Amy Bishop, are going to shoot places up.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 2,113]

You forgot to mention your heroine crime-stopper with the CCW who offed her parents.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

Still can't find anything to back your lie, can you?

I provided dates and times of my posts contradicting your lie; you provided zilch.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

Still can't find anything to back your lie, can you?

I provided dates and times of my posts contradicting your lie; you provided zilch.

Dude, I remeber what was posted by you in that thread. If I didnt I wouldnt stick my neck out so far here

Did you say ban directly ? No. You never (or hardly ever) give any direct answers to anything. But your "solution" given in that thread would result in a near ban and you got hammered on it. Now you are back to your pussy footing around dont stick your neck out back tracking twisting words talk in cirles cover your back type replies again so you dont get nailed again posts

No lie sir and you know it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

Still can't find anything to back your lie, can you?

I provided dates and times of my posts contradicting your lie; you provided zilch.

Dude, I remeber what was posted by you in that thread. If I didnt I wouldnt stick my neck out so far here

Did you say ban directly ? No. You never (or hardly ever) give any direct answers to anything. But your "solution" given in that thread would result in a near ban and you got hammered on it. Now you are back to your pussy footing around dont stick your neck out back tracking twisting words talk in cirles cover your back type replies again so you dont get nailed again posts

No lie sir and you know it

Zilch, that's all you have.

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

I recall getting a two week ban for noting how much you resembled Goebbels. But it's a free pass for you, apparently?

Your strategy is to flood the history with a large number of vague postings to try to hide the others. And to avoid making any non vague statements.

But can you guys STFU already about what each other did or did not say, and just say it now. Or nothing at all. It's a bit boring watching you all call each other liars and give shitty evidence to support. I don't care about the past. New thread, new discussion. I'm sure as hell not going to search 33k posts. Besides, it's pretty transparent knowing where all of you stand.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

I recall getting a two week ban for noting how much you resembled Goebbels. But it's a free pass for you, apparently?

The moderators will have to decide whether emulating is the same as resembling.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.", JG.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

Still can't find anything to back your lie, can you?

I provided dates and times of my posts contradicting your lie; you provided zilch.

Dude, I remeber what was posted by you in that thread. If I didnt I wouldnt stick my neck out so far here

Did you say ban directly ? No. You never (or hardly ever) give any direct answers to anything. But your "solution" given in that thread would result in a near ban and you got hammered on it. Now you are back to your pussy footing around dont stick your neck out back tracking twisting words talk in cirles cover your back type replies again so you dont get nailed again posts

No lie sir and you know it

Zilch, that's all you have.

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

sucks when your intimidation tactics not longer work huh

get specific. that is all that is being asked
I will not hold my breath for that ot happen however

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

Still can't find anything to back your lie, can you?

I provided dates and times of my posts contradicting your lie; you provided zilch.

Dude, I remeber what was posted by you in that thread. If I didnt I wouldnt stick my neck out so far here

Did you say ban directly ? No. You never (or hardly ever) give any direct answers to anything. But your "solution" given in that thread would result in a near ban and you got hammered on it. Now you are back to your pussy footing around dont stick your neck out back tracking twisting words talk in cirles cover your back type replies again so you dont get nailed again posts

No lie sir and you know it

Zilch, that's all you have.

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

sucks when your intimidation tactics not longer work huh

get specific. that is all that is being asked
I will not hold my breath for that ot happen however

Is this specific enough for you:

Quote

Guns have legitimate use in self-defense, hunting and sport, and are no threat in the hands of sane, careful, law abiding people.
...
In principle I don't think the government should prevent sane, careful, law abiding adults from owning guns.

ME, March 11, 2007

or how about this for being specific:

Quote

We need a few, uniform gun laws that make sense, protect the rights of sane law abiding adults, can't be circumvented by crossing a state line or city boundary, and that severely punish those that abuse them.

ME, Sept 1, 2006

or

Quote

Nothing is to gained by preventing truly law abiding (as opposed to self-proclaimed "law abiding"), sane, responsible adults from having guns.

ME, Dec 19, 2007

or

Quote

Law abiding, sane people should be allowed to own guns.

ME, Sept. 5, 2008

or

Quote

There is no reason a sane, law abiding adult should be prevented from owning a firearm.

ME, Sept 7, 2008, IN RESPONSE TO YOU.


Now exercise a little reading comprehension for a change.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Interpretation - you can't find any.

you're implying that you do NOT want to take guns away from everyone.

Can you make a simple statement to that effect?

See my posts Sep 5, 2008, 12:05 PM and Sep 7, 2008, 11:30 AM for examples (among many).

Also Apr 16, 2008, 5:09 PM, Dec 19, 2007, 10:08 AM, Mar 11, 2007, 7:29 AM, and Sep 2, 2006, 6:34 AM

Fact is, rushmc makes the same lying claim repeatedly, but the evidence is very clear that it is a lie.

fun watching you squirm

Still can't find anything to back your lie, can you?

I provided dates and times of my posts contradicting your lie; you provided zilch.

Dude, I remeber what was posted by you in that thread. If I didnt I wouldnt stick my neck out so far here

Did you say ban directly ? No. You never (or hardly ever) give any direct answers to anything. But your "solution" given in that thread would result in a near ban and you got hammered on it. Now you are back to your pussy footing around dont stick your neck out back tracking twisting words talk in cirles cover your back type replies again so you dont get nailed again posts

No lie sir and you know it

Zilch, that's all you have.

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

sucks when your intimidation tactics not longer work huh

get specific. that is all that is being asked
I will not hold my breath for that ot happen however

Is this specific enough for you:

Quote

Guns have legitimate use in self-defense, hunting and sport, and are no threat in the hands of sane, careful, law abiding people.
...
In principle I don't think the government should prevent sane, careful, law abiding adults from owning guns.

ME, March 11, 2007

or how about this for being specific:

Quote

We need a few, uniform gun laws that make sense, protect the rights of sane law abiding adults, can't be circumvented by crossing a state line or city boundary, and that severely punish those that abuse them.

ME, Sept 1, 2006

or

Quote

Nothing is to gained by preventing truly law abiding (as opposed to self-proclaimed "law abiding"), sane, responsible adults from having guns.

ME, Dec 19, 2007

or

Quote

Law abiding, sane people should be allowed to own guns.

ME, Sept. 5, 2008

or

Quote

There is no reason a sane, law abiding adult should be prevented from owning a firearm.

ME, Sept 7, 2008, IN RESPONSE TO YOU.


Now exercise a little reading comprehension for a change.

Yes, You have posted all of those things
BUT, and this is a big but
When you came forward specifically about the laws/rules you think should be used it was in essance a ban

If not, post the specifics you propose that would acomplish what you post here AND not infringe on second amendment law abiding right to have weapons?

Comprehension is everything, so are specifics and clarity

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

No lie sir and you know it

Zilch, that's all you have.

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.
sucks when your intimidation tactics not longer work huh

get specific. that is all that is being asked
I will not hold my breath for that ot happen however

Is this specific enough for you:

Quote

Guns have legitimate use in self-defense, hunting and sport, and are no threat in the hands of sane, careful, law abiding people.
...
In principle I don't think the government should prevent sane, careful, law abiding adults from owning guns.

ME, March 11, 2007

or how about this for being specific:

Quote

We need a few, uniform gun laws that make sense, protect the rights of sane law abiding adults, can't be circumvented by crossing a state line or city boundary, and that severely punish those that abuse them.

ME, Sept 1, 2006

or

Quote

Nothing is to gained by preventing truly law abiding (as opposed to self-proclaimed "law abiding"), sane, responsible adults from having guns.

ME, Dec 19, 2007

or

Quote

Law abiding, sane people should be allowed to own guns.

ME, Sept. 5, 2008

or

Quote

There is no reason a sane, law abiding adult should be prevented from owning a firearm.

ME, Sept 7, 2008, IN RESPONSE TO YOU.


Now exercise a little reading comprehension for a change.

Yes, You have posted all of those things
BUT, and this is a big but
When you came forward specifically about the laws/rules you think should be used it was in essance a ban


You keep repeating the same lie but every single time you have been asked to back up your claim you are unable to do it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

No lie sir and you know it

Zilch, that's all you have.

I provided author, date, time of my posts proving your lie, and you have zilch but you continue to emulate Josef Goebbels in the hope that eventually someone will believe you.

sucks when your intimidation tactics not longer work huh

get specific. that is all that is being asked
I will not hold my breath for that ot happen however

Is this specific enough for you:

Quote

Guns have legitimate use in self-defense, hunting and sport, and are no threat in the hands of sane, careful, law abiding people.
...
In principle I don't think the government should prevent sane, careful, law abiding adults from owning guns.

ME, March 11, 2007

or how about this for being specific:

Quote

We need a few, uniform gun laws that make sense, protect the rights of sane law abiding adults, can't be circumvented by crossing a state line or city boundary, and that severely punish those that abuse them.

ME, Sept 1, 2006

or

Quote

Nothing is to gained by preventing truly law abiding (as opposed to self-proclaimed "law abiding"), sane, responsible adults from having guns.

ME, Dec 19, 2007

or

Quote

Law abiding, sane people should be allowed to own guns.

ME, Sept. 5, 2008

or

Quote

There is no reason a sane, law abiding adult should be prevented from owning a firearm.

ME, Sept 7, 2008, IN RESPONSE TO YOU.


Now exercise a little reading comprehension for a change.

Yes, You have posted all of those things
BUT, and this is a big but
When you came forward specifically about the laws/rules you think should be used it was in essance a ban


You keep repeating the same lie but every single time you have been asked to back up your claim you are unable to do it.

Your generalizations are clear. Your specifics are not.

You have some clear ideas/goals, now, how would you go about making them come to fruition? Specifics please.

Please?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[millertime24 8]

Quote

Asked and answered previously.

Now, why don't you exercise your own brain and see if YOU can figure out what was wrong with a system that allowed a KNOWN nutcase like Cho to LEGALLY buy the guns with which he slaughtered 32 people.

Ok. That link did provide some usefull links to support your position. What I'm wondering is How does one go about finding out about someones medical profile before selling an instrument of potential destruction. Note that I didn't use the term "gun" because many different things can be used to kill someone (take cars for example).

I guess what I'm asking now is with the Privacy Act of 1974 what can the guy behind the gun counter do to check the validity of the buyers claim? Also there is a question on the form when you go to buy any firearm that states something like "Do you or have you ever had history of a mental illness?". If I answere any question on that form incorrectly then I am by all rights a FELON. Not saying people can't lie, but it still begs the question how do you know their telling the truth?

Muff #5048