I thought this thread was just anti black people.This thread is a fail!
Just like most anti gun arguments
Nah I think it's a pro "teh stupid" thread.I thought this thread was just anti black people.
I fixed it.This thread is a fail!
Just like most mmike threads
Which ones fails the most, TheMontashu?This thread is a fail!
Just like most anti gun arguments
I would say the biggest gun control fail is the idea that passing gun laws will all of the sudden make criminals start following the law.Which ones fails the most, TheMontashu?
You don't argue on the Internet much, do you?I don't think anyone has in earnest made that argument TheMontashu.
I don't think anyone has in earnest made that argument TheMontashu.
You don't argue on the Internet much, do you?
Did he beat the red out of you shortly after the pic?
you mean a shooting like this tonight? I was there on Friday and that neighborhood gives me the creeps.I did think about this today.
The next big shooting, there will be a backlash against guns, the usual complaints, etc.
The next time a gun is used in self-defense, it won't make a ripple at all.
That 1 year old was coming right at him.you mean a shooting like this tonight? I was there on Friday and that neighborhood gives me the creeps.
At least eight shot including 1-year-old child in West Oakland - San Jose Mercury News
for anyone in the mortuary or funeral tradeMore guns would have solved that whole situation.
I like how you assume those guns were purchased legallyyou mean a shooting like this tonight? I was there on Friday and that neighborhood gives me the creeps.
At least eight shot including 1-year-old child in West Oakland - San Jose Mercury News
And thus, arguing your talking point regardless of context or reality continues. This is the way of the Internet Gun Control Debate. I think if it ever changes, it's a sign of the imminent apocalypse.I like how you assume those guns were purchased legally
Mooshoo's point is very relevant, unless your argument is are all guns bad.And thus, arguing your talking point regardless of context or reality continues. This is the way of the Internet Gun Control Debate. I think if it ever changes, it's a sign of the imminent apocalypse.
It's not that it's not relevant or I don't in many ways agree with him, it's that he's making complete non-sequiturs. He's making up things to argue against that haven't been argued.Mooshoo's point is very relevant, unless your argument is are all guns bad.
I know that gun wasn't purchased in Oakland, because the last gun shop closed in 2000.
Possibly the gun was sold from San Leandro, considering that shop was closed by the Feds because of faulty records and that several of their guns were recovered in the use of a crime.
This is one of the problems with gun control debates: many of the debaters do not fully understand gun politics and laws, so the debate either becomes ban all guns or let everyone have one.
I believe in a fair amount of gun control, particular at the point of sale. But for legal owners, fewer restrictions should be forced upon them.
How come you like guns? I thought as a resident hipster you would want to register sticks and stones as guns and prohibit them.This thread is a fail!
Just like most anti gun arguments
Stricter gun laws = less people buying guns legaly = less gun shops and lower gun production = harder to buy a gun legaly or illegaly.I would say the biggest gun control fail is the idea that passing gun laws will all of the sudden make criminals start following the law.
no I was just replying to the comment re: the next big shooting and the accompaning bruhaha. it had nothing to do with the source of the guns.I like how you assume those guns were purchased legally
That's crazy talkStricter gun laws = less people buying guns legaly = less gun shops and lower gun production = harder to buy a gun legaly or illegaly.
This is what most no-gun nuts easily overlook. They see the problem with the devices themselves rather than the people that use them. How many people have been stabbed to death with a pencil, key, screwdriver, etc.?I like how you assume those guns were purchased legally
Do you know why Oakland's gun shops disappeared? It is not because of a lack of popularity or even gun purchase restrictions.Stricter gun laws = less people buying guns legaly = less gun shops and lower gun production = harder to buy a gun legaly or illegaly.
There are no longer any gun shops in San Francisco as well because of they have been zoned out by city supervisors.Any store that sells guns or ammunition must pay the city $24 for every $1,000 made on any merchandise sold, from guns to fishing rods to books.
Prior to the tax's approval, such businesses paid $1.20 for every $1,000 in receipts.
Last Gun Shop in Oakland Closing / Steep tax ruined profits, owner says - SFGate
when I visited the John Jovino Gun Shop, the city’s oldest, the mildest inquiry elicited a swift and gruff response. Show me your police identification, I was told, or goodbye. The store does not sell to civilians.
Among the reasons this policy is remarkable is that it isn’t actually true. John Jovino does sell to civilians, as a subsequent phone call confirmed. But apparently it is not eager to do so.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/nyregion/30critic.html