The disengenouous NRA.

[iluvatar5150]

I support this. If every single woman was armed, there would be a ton less rape going on. Guaranteed.

Over in the UK, a woman was raped on a bus... literally on a UK city bus, while everyone on the bus did nothing, because none were armed.

Quite frankly, you claim people being able to defend themselves would be the wild west, and yet things are far worse today with far fewer people being armed. You want us to be in an anarchy society, not the NRA.

By what measure are things "far worse today" ? And against what time period are we making the comparison?

Additionally, your entire premise about bg checks is absurd. You're essentially arguing that since they don't perform flawlessly, then they don't serve any function or benefit at all. That's the equivalent of saying that since some people speed, speed limits are useless and don't save any lives. You completely ignore the people who are blocked from buying weapons by the checks and the people who don't try in the first place because they know they would fail.

 

[Zatek]

What on earth are you talking about?

The NRA being disingenuous about actually keeping firearms away from the mentally ill, has nothing to do with my posting history and apparent duty to be offended by gun crimes committed by kids raised in single parent households.

Your logical fallacy's are ad hominem and non-sequitur.

I'm giving you a chance to explain why you care so much about the <100 people murdered by mentally ill people with guns but not the ~15,000 or so that are murdered each year overall. Just seems odd that you care so much about the lives of people who you can use to advance your political agenda, but the ones you can't suddenly aren't worth mentioning. Very suspicious.

 

[wing2000]

Don't be ridiculous.

Canada had a total national licensing registration data base. After running the system for years... literally years, and spending hundreds of millions on the system... turned out they could not even provide a single... not even ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE where the background checks or the registry prevent a crime or shooting.

...just out of curiosity, how would Canada prove that a crime was prevented by an action taken before it occurred?

 

[variant]

I'm giving you a chance to explain why you care so much about the <100 people murdered by mentally ill people with guns but not the ~15,000 or so that are murdered each year overall. Just seems odd that you care so much about the lives of people who you can use to advance your political agenda, but the ones you can't suddenly aren't worth mentioning. Very suspicious.

My thread is about how the NRA decried seriously mentally ill individuals getting their hands on firearms while they have done nearly everything in their power to keep measures that stop that from being implemented.

That you think I'm not allowed to point such a discrepancy out because I apparently not paid enough attention to other crimes to your liking is noted and ignored.

If you intend If your contribution to that thread to be attacking me for not being more concerned about something else then please leave my thread as your posts are off topic.

 

[Snappy1]

Don't be ridiculous.

Canada had a total national licensing registration data base. After running the system for years... literally years, and spending hundreds of millions on the system... turned out they could not even provide a single... not even ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE where the background checks or the registry prevent a crime or shooting.

Not even one.

And you want to tell me that the only reason, the ONLY REASON... that our background checks didn't work is because of the NRA?

No, you are out of your mind.

When I was in school, and this was back in the 90s, I knew who to talk to, to buy a gun, drugs, and all kinds of illegal stuff. Everyone knew who to talk to. No amount of background checks can stop a teenager from getting Heroin, Pot, Smokes, Beer, or guns. You can't even stop a teenager, but you think you can stop everyone else?

No, you are only wrong, but crazy.

Well that's a lie. Canada has stricter gun regulations than the US has, and the US can point to 3 million denials since the background check system was implemented. The idea that Canada couldn't point to one instance of that is....stupid.

And yeah, you can stop teenagers from getting guns, cigarettes and booze. It's through this current system, it's new so I understand if you haven't heard of it and it's a little complicated, I know, but it's called checking IDs.

 

[Snappy1]

...just out of curiosity, how would Canada prove that a crime was prevented by an action taken before it occurred?

If a background check results in a denial of a sale of a firearm to a prohibited person, then a crime has been prevented. Specifically, a prohibited person possessing a firearm.

 

[variant]

...just out of curiosity, how would Canada prove that a crime was prevented by an action taken before it occurred?

If gun crimes were prevented one could point to a lack of gun crime for instance.

Since Canadian gun related homicides are 7 times lower per capita than the United States, it would be hard to say their stricter background checks are ineffective.

 

[Belk]

I support this. If every single woman was armed, there would be a ton less rape going on. Guaranteed.

Over in the UK, a woman was raped on a bus... literally on a UK city bus, while everyone on the bus did nothing, because none were armed.

Quite frankly, you claim people being able to defend themselves would be the wild west, and yet things are far worse today with far fewer people being armed. You want us to be in an anarchy society, not the NRA.

Have a link to that, because google can't seem to find it.

 

[Ringo84]

They (the NRA) are extremists. Gun control is not an extreme position, but saying that the Second Amendment is absolute and untouchable is.

Also, I'm totally not a Russian bot! 11001001
Яingo

 

[Andrew77]

Have a link to that, because google can't seem to find it.

Girl, 14, raped by men on city bus

14 years old. No other passengers did anything. Helpless lemmings. But at least no one was able to defend themselves, or the girl. That's all that matters to the gun control people.

 

[Snappy1]

Girl, 14, raped by men on city bus

14 years old. No other passengers did anything. Helpless lemmings. But at least no one was able to defend themselves, or the girl. That's all that matters to the gun control people.

From the article:

"Her friend, also 14, went up to see her and raised the alarm with passengers downstairs.

A woman and two men came to the girls' aid."

Genius.

 

[Belk]

Girl, 14, raped by men on city bus

14 years old. No other passengers did anything. Helpless lemmings. But at least no one was able to defend themselves, or the girl. That's all that matters to the gun control people.

From your link.

A woman and two men came to the girls' aid. They all left the bus two stops along from Silverburn.

The passengers are said to have waited with the girls until they got another bus home, thought to be in the Darnley area of the city, where police were contacted.

Your claim that that people who are for gun control want people to be helpless is both incorrect and inflammatory.

 

[Andrew77]

From the article:

"Her friend, also 14, went up to see her and raised the alarm with passengers downstairs.

A woman and two men came to the girls' aid."

Genius.

Then that isn't even the right one. I thought the 2013 date was too early, but I couldn't find the one I read. The one I read, two guys followed a girl up to the top of the bus and raped her, while her friend watched but was too scared to call for help.

The only time passengers came to that girls aid, was after they were done raping the girl.

If this isn't the same event, then it means twice a girl was raped on a city bus in the UK. That's terrible.

I would have shot a guy, if I caught him raping a girl. That's whole reason I got a conceal and carry, is so I can defend not only myself, but innocent people I'm around.

 

[Snappy1]

Then that isn't even the right one. I thought the 2013 date was too early, but I couldn't find the one I read. The one I read, two guys followed a girl up to the top of the bus and raped her, while her friend watched but was too scared to call for help.

The only time passengers came to that girls aid, was after they were done raping the girl.

If this isn't the same event, then it means twice a girl was raped on a city bus in the UK. That's terrible.

I would have shot a guy, if I caught him raping a girl. That's whole reason I got a conceal and carry, is so I can defend not only myself, but innocent people I'm around.

No it means you forgot the details of the story or, more likely, you read it on FreedomEaglez.net, or some other equally prestigious site, and they lied about the details.

 

[Belk]

Then that isn't even the right one. I thought the 2013 date was too early, but I couldn't find the one I read. The one I read, two guys followed a girl up to the top of the bus and raped her, while her friend watched but was too scared to call for help.

The only time passengers came to that girls aid, was after they were done raping the girl.

If this isn't the same event, then it means twice a girl was raped on a city bus in the UK. That's terrible.

I would have shot a guy, if I caught him raping a girl. That's whole reason I got a conceal and carry, is so I can defend not only myself, but innocent people I'm around.

Then you would be in jail for murder. As a CCW carrier I highly suggest you take a class in legal use of deadly force.

 

[Andrew77]

No it means you forgot the details of the story or, more likely, you read it on FreedomEaglez.net, or some other equally prestigious site, and they lied about the details.

I have no idea what freedomeaglez is. The fact you have to make assumptions about people you don't know, reflects badly on your ability to defend your position.

I doubt it. I thought 2013 was the wrong year, because I remember this being around 2007.

Even so, I would still bet you anything if private citizens could defend themselves, those guys would never have tried to rape those girls on a bus with passengers.

 

[Ringo84]

A gun is not the one and only way for a private citizen to defend themselves.
Ringo

 

[Andrew77]

Then you would be in jail for murder. As a CCW carrier I highly suggest you take a class in legal use of deadly force.

I do not care. I will GLADLY go to jail, to save a woman from being raped. I give a crap what the legal us laws are. If the law says I can't shoot a guy trying to a rape a women, then the law is wrong, and evil.

And quite frankly, I'd rather spend the rest of my life being able to look myself in the mirror behind bars, knowing I did what I could, than be a free man not being able to sleep with myself at night.

We have far too many pathetic excuses for men, in this country. Too worthless wimps who would rather have their own comfort, than standing up for what is right. Makes me sick.

 

[Andrew77]

A gun is not the one and only way for a private citizen to defend themselves.
Ringo

There is no better way. I've seen men sprayed with mace and pepper spray, and shake it off like nothing.

I've seen men hit with tasers, and act like it was nothing more than a flee bite.

But bullet? No. Not unless you are hopped up on a enough drugs to drive a man insane... and even then you shoot enough, they'll stop.

 

[Ringo84]

Yeah...OK. I get the anger for rapists; that's legitimate and understandable. You should be angry about that.

But the tough talk about "not caring" about going to jail for shooting someone and ranting about "worthless wimps" strikes me as overcompensation. It's a recipe for a disaster to carry that kind of attitude into a situation where a woman might be assaulted because you could easily misinterpret something innocent for rape.

We don't necessarily need supposedly "good guys with guns" charging into every situation trying to save the day. More often than not, they can turn a bad situation into a worse one by waving a gun around and shooting blindly before knowing all the facts. That's why more guns is not the issue to the problems we're facing.
Ringo