DaVinci

You intentionally ignored this part in bold: FL has a 10-20-25 to life that works fine when they use it. One of the police officers that was killed executing a warrant was for a guy that had already committed an armed robbery. The Judge did not give the mandatory 10 year sentence since he was 17 when he committed the crime. So how about we actually follow the current laws before we add more. It is not like making murder *doubly* illegal will do anything unless we actually punish those that do it. You will never remove ALL crime. But there is little sense to punish the innocent for crimes they didn't commit. If we made it mandatory that all cars had to have an alcohol interlock device, limited the HP to 100HP and limited the tip speed to 75 we would certainly make driving safer.... But would that be fair to those that do not speed, and don't drink and drive?

How about you just answer the question I asked? You don't see pointing out how one side got up in arms about a target, yet then makes comments about "getting bloody" as fair?

Then those bills should have that included as well. You don't think we should have that information before we pass a bill? Besides the CBO: 1T was passed around long ago as the cost for the HC bill. 138m are expected to pay tax each year, and the number was for 10 years. About 730 dollars per tax payer per year. This of course does not include any other tax needs or the tax payers personal HC costs. So if you knew passing the HC bill would add 730 dollars to your tax bill a year.... Or 7,300 total is that OK with you? For that matter... You know the bailouts equaled about $9,513.76 per U.S. taxpayer? http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/news/0901/gallery.money_summit/index.html

Please read my first post in this thread and then see who attacked who first. And then look at this history of "dialog" between the those you claim I am bashing and myself. You will see people get what they give with me.

ATF says they run traces on about 70k guns a year. Of those, 50k of those involve weapon offenses, many of which are never prosecuted http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/nation/guns/gunpart2.html No, but punish ACTIONS not objects. * Would you support a ban on any car with more than 100 hp and limited to 75mph top speed? Think of the benefits in reductions of speeding, accidents, and carbon emissions! * Would you support requiring alcohol interlocks to be put on every car? http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/support-grows-for-alcohol-interlocks-on-cars/ Think of the lives THAT would save!!!!! The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety estimated that in 2007, if anyone with a blood alcohol level of .08 or higher could have been prevented from starting a vehicle, almost 9,000 lives would have been saved. There are about 1 million drunken-driving convictions a year Alcohol-involved crashes in New Mexico are down 30 percent, injuries 32 percent and fatalities 22 percent, he said. How about a ban on pools? Would you support that? In 2004, of all children 1-4 years old who died, 26% died from drowning (CDC 2006). Fatal drowning remains the second-leading cause of unintentional injury-related death for children ages 1 to 14 years (CDC 2005) An estimated 5,000 children ages 14 and under are hospitalized due to unintentional drowning-related incidents each year; 15 percent die in the hospital and as many as 20 percent suffer severe, permanent neurological disability. Also, don't forget that the majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides. ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/ncipc/10LC-2003/PDF/10lc-violence.pdf. And that people with a criminal record are also more likely to die as homicide victims. Cook, Philip J., Jens Ludwig (2000). "Chapter 2". Gun Violence: The Real Costs. Oxford University Press. So unless you are suicidal, or a criminal... Your chances of dying due to gun violence is greatly reduced.

And how many unions have threatened the workers to join? And you ignored my question... so I will ask again: You don't see pointing out how one side got up in arms about a target, yet then makes comments about "getting bloody" as fair?

One reference Spitzer, Robert J.: The Politics of Gun Control", page 1. Chatham House Publishers, Inc., 1995 The bookings institute stated they found 300 Even using the 300 number... How many laws against murder do you think we need? And how would adding more actually reduce the number of murders?

This again shows you have no idea about gun laws.

Why are you refusing to answer the questions I asked you? How many more do you think will stop them form using guns? How will preventing an honest citizen from owning something prevent crime? FL has a 10-20-25 to life that works fine when they use it. Now, answer my questions.

Cool... You wanna sit around your house and get wasted.... Fine by me. You wanna sit around and get wasted then drive? Not fine by me (of course we have laws to already cover this... No need to add more). You wanna sit around and get wasted and collect welfare since you can't work? Not fine by me. You wanna sit around your house and get wasted while neglecting your children. Not fine by me (But we already have laws to cover this....No need to add more). You have the right to do ANYTHING you want as long as you do not create a hardship on someone else.

Then you should be fine with not allowing individuals to have airplanes since a terrorist could use one.

True, but: The Crusades French Wars of Religion Thirty Years War Taiping Rebellion The Inquisition Islamic extremists The list of evil things done in the name of 'god' is quite long and just keeps going. I have no issue with a belief in a higher power... Just acting like a jackass because of it.

True, which is why I don't support a ban on religion.

We already have 20,000 gun laws, that does not stop criminals from using guns. How many more do you think will stop them form using guns? How will preventing an honest citizen from owning something prevent crime?

Have laws against ACTIONS, not objects. To make this an equal comparison: Pro-gun: Make speeding and driving drunk illegal Anti-gun: Outlaw any car over 100 hp and require breathalyzers on all cars. See the difference?

Sorry should have said "illegal" At any rate it still shows that making something illegal does nothing. Wanna stop murder? Well lets just pass ANOTHER law against murder. See the stupid in that statement?

Distasteful, but I agree on the ruling. If I lived near Topeka, Kan I would mount a picket line of the Church. This is a major reason I find all religions to be crap.

You answered it yourself. No law will stop a criminal, all they do is hurt an honest person. You yourself said that, "no law will stop criminals". So why push for new laws when you KNOW they will not actually stop criminals and only hurt innocent citizens? That makes zero sense. You yourself said that laws will not stop criminals... so why is it silly to say that? Now you have some idea why we bristle when people say we need more gun laws... History shows (and you agree) that they do not stop criminals. So why bother making new laws when we have 20,000 on the books already? The last good gun law was 1968 and it had parts that were not good. The rest have been "feel good" BS that does nothing to actually prevent crime. And if you want to prevent crime... Why not just increase punishment for crimes? Do you really think a "No guns allowed" area will prevent a criminal from taking a gun somewhere? All it does is limit an honest persons right to self defense. That makes no sense.

I have long wished bills had a "Cost to individual taxpayer" entry. That way before you support the invasion of Iraq, or publicly funded HC, you could see the projected bottom line and make a better choice.

You not I are the one with the inconsistencies in parental consent laws. Talk about a bizarre leap in logic The only thing we seem to be able to agree on is your inconsistencies in logic.

Wow this is not a difficult concept... I can only hope you are being obtuse on purpose as opposed to on accident. Bacteria is not an early life stage of a human.

Historically? How many innocent Jews were killed by Germany vs the US? The answer to that question has the same relevance as your stupid question. You seem to think that the weapon causes crime.... A juvenile opinion. Germany has MORE illegal weapons per person that the US, but LESS gun crime. So your "theory" has been debunked with your own example.

Reading is fundamental..... You are confusing the two areas. 1. He said he went to a Church with a certain pastor for 20 years -- That is not a big deal and could easily be taken at his word. Same with him being friends with Ayers. He said he is friends. That is evidence enough to support the claim. 2. That pastor has a history of anti-American rants and Ayers did terrorist bombing. Taking #1 at the Presidents word is easy. That does not justify #2. Yes, you want something, but not bad enough for YOU to pay for it (even though you clearly can). Instead, you want ME to pay for the things YOU want. And your hypocrisy is quite clear. Ah, so honesty is not important to you.... We could actually already tell that from your history BTW.

You don't see pointing out how one side got up in arms about a target, yet then makes comments about "getting bloody" as fair?

Got it, you are afraid to engage in any real discussion preferring to play childish word games. I have asked you several times in several different ways... you ignore them and attack the weakest argument. Typical for you and lame as normal.