DaVinci
-
Content
3,518 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by DaVinci
-
This was not in a bar.... and there have been no cases of a gun fight in a bar caused by this... So your argument has no data and is just hot air.
-
I guess you are also a hypocrite if you pay insurance all your life and when your house burns down expect to get paid? Your arguments can be boiled down to you not having a leg to stand on other than yelling louder and louder.
-
Wrong. If you are correct, why did he only manage to kill 6 when he had magazines that held 30 rounds?
-
And to carry a gun you have to prove you are competent, be educated, and are tested.....albeit minimally False. To carry you must pass a class. Both guns and cars have no requirement to OWN them, only use them. To carry a gun you must do all of that in most States.
-
Key word being "almost". Fact is he didn't hurt anyone. So much for the "blood on the streets".
-
False. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-01-11/news/bs-ed-maryland-gun-control-letter-20110111_1_assault-weapons-bullets-shooting "We can only hope that now Congress will re-enact this life-saving law." So you are incorrect. And it is illegal to brandish a gun in a fight, it is illegal to shoot someone, it is illegal to even threaten to shoot someone. And all of those carry a penalty higher than drunk driving. And a gun dealer can be sent to jail for selling a gun illegally. And a persons gun rights can be removed for a number of reasons. Penalties for gun crimes are higher than DWI.
-
Glad you take such glee in the murder of two children The fact is this woman waited 5 days and used a revolver. So two anti gun pushes failed there..... Mandatory wait period, and capacity limit. You just keep proving your own positions to be wrong.
-
Your company had over 100k stolen from it without you even knowing. That 100k could have paid for HC for your handful of employees. You just choose not to do it.
-
1. Why do you get to decide what is allowed? 2. You do know that the Second was not to protect the right to hunt?
-
How about you answer the question he asked? "Then why didn't the insurance company know he was going to flip out and shoot people? "
-
And you are wrong. We always say less crime... Not NO crime. Shooting someone is a crime, but Murder is also a crime. In the police shootings, no one died. So there was less crimes being committed since the police killed the attacker before he could kill them or shoot more people. You just keep proving OUR point with every post.
-
Yes, but unless you have a magic wand... That will never happen. Look at prohibition.... didn't work. Look at banning drugs.... does not work. Look at banning drunk driving.... People still do it. Look at banning killing.... Does not stop it. Look at banning guns.... Criminals still get and use them. So you might as well just make murder "double illegal". It will have the same effect.
-
Are you are trying to claim that the officers returning fire and killing the suspect didn't stop the suspect from killing more people? Fail. Compare this shooting to the last unarmed area killings for body count. Say look at VT where Cho killed 32 people and injured 25. Ft. Hood the suspect killed 13 and injured 30, AZ the shooter killed 6 and injured 13 . This police station shooting had 0 dead, and 3 wounded 0 < any of the above. While the Detroit shooting is a tragedy.... It actually proves that when a crazy starts shooting that the innocent death count is less when the targets are armed.
-
Some people do not actually get the concept of a free market..... He is one of them.
-
And I agree. It should be noted, however, that police cams in cars have been used to justify the police actions in more instances than it has been shown to prove the police incorrect. But hey.... I have zero issue recording every interaction with the police. Keeps everyone honest.
-
Another Court Rules Obama Care Unconstitutional
DaVinci replied to rushmc's topic in Speakers Corner
This is better than an expensive program that is expensive, unable to be paid for, and unconstitutional -
Same thing I was thinking about you.... I guess we can agree on something.
-
Bawny Fwank, "Hiers Didn't Do Anything To Deserve Inheritance"
DaVinci replied to skyrider's topic in Speakers Corner
Wow, what a thoughtful and enlightened post..... You stated your opinion and provided some data to support it. -
Still waiting on Quade to answer how he feels about Doug Forth having a military pin that he didn't earn.... Quade?
-
The actual outcome does not support your theory. He fired several shots and missed.
-
I just wish she had been allowed to carry a gun in that purse.
-
Make the cutoff whatever is decided to be "poverty level" And that would be the average cost to sustain a person over the year.
-
I am still waiting for you to discuss the issue... If you are able. You are just avoiding the topic again. It would be a FEDERAL tax so the STATE would not handle it. As soon as you spend even one second on the other side.... I'll start taking this kind of advice from you. And it was never about the price of the product, it was about the price of the TAX on the product. For a guy that does not like progressive tax schemes.... You seem to love them when they are progressive downward. No, not really.
-
Artificially inflating wages beyond the point that allows the end product to be sold for a profit. This results in cost cutting in other areas.... Like GM did and the Govt had to bail them out. It seems the Union didn't really help you... So why are you defending them so much?
-
The thing is both sides oversimplify the whole situation. And the bigger issue is just because you might agree with a cause does not automatically mean you should agree to the "solution" proposed. The climate has been changing since the big bang/God said "poof". to claim it is all 100% due to mankind is ignoring history. To claim all the pollution is doing nothing is ignoring science. But even if one agrees with a problem... that does not mean the solution (For example carbon tax) is a good idea. Of course, no one seems to be willing to look past party lines (not you specifically, just saw an opening here).