let's just cut to the chase, Gun Fanbois.....

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:08 pm

Do keep it together long enough to be wrong, old man. I don't give a rats ass what your personality is. The point is your arguments are ★■◆●, and you attempt to reinforce them with BS like this while claiming to be calling us to high ground. There are a lot of good arguments FOR firearms in any country. Ostensibly crazy people getting a-hold of a firearm and using it on unarmed innocents more than in the past is not an argument against firearms in our country by any reasonable standard, and aside from removing the motivation for meaningless mass killings, arming people in any target group is the obvious solution, it is not an exacerbation of the problem as you so carelessly suggest.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:26 pm

I'll disagree, and have pointed out why enough, Thorne as to not wish to keep repeating it......until the next mass killing occurs in a school, in a church, in a theater, in a playground or a mall. Until then, cling to your beliefs, and I will mine.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:30 pm

in the meantime, THIS guy gets my whole argument(either get on board or don't whine about the solution your fellow citizens move to):

https://medium.com/@EricConradFL/we-re- ... 5f80b79f07

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:31 pm

You lose badly.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:38 pm

you make no sense. Sorry, but that just didn't.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:41 pm

Also... That article lies, and you lie. We're not facing inconvenience at the firearm counter--we're facing the fate that the citizens of so many countries are experiencing as their country bans firearms for personal defense. Those people are true second-class citizens, as they must look only to their government for personal protection.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:48 pm

callmeslick wrote:you make no sense. Sorry, but that just didn't.

My grammar hurts. It means you lose badly because once you begin to lose you disengage in order to avoid a loss. I am glad you don't bother to repeat anything I've read from you in the past, which you apparently believe opposes what I've just written, because it doesn't hold water. I just think you need to wake up and realize that's why it's not worth repeating. I call bull★■◆● on your "safety", again, because there is only so much safety a free individual can realistically expect, until he is ready to sacrifice freedom for it. People didn't die for freedom just so we can fork it over in exchange for your notions of safety.

Maybe you ought to pull your head out and go after elements of our modern culture which enable people to kill large numbers of people they don't even know just to attempt to fulfill some personal need to inflict destruction or send a message (to who?). I guess you know how to ban guns, but who knows how to prosecute that?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:15 am

nah, Thorne, public safety isn't a the core of the issue.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:36 am

Funny how back in the 60's when I went to college, we could keep our rifles and shotguns, bows up in our dorm room and nobody gave it a second thought. No shootings occurred, no mass murders. So what changed in he last fifty years that make people like slick paranoid about guns and want to take them away from everybody?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:53 am

woodchip wrote:Funny how back in the 60's when I went to college, we could keep our rifles and shotguns, bows up in our dorm room and nobody gave it a second thought. No shootings occurred, no mass murders. So what changed in he last fifty years that make people like slick paranoid about guns and want to take them away from everybody?

first off, you went to a unique institution, as most colleges in New England wouldn't have accepted that for the firearms. Second, what did happen in those past 50 years? That is a fair question. I think, to a great extent, we've devalued and negated respect for fellow citizens and their lives.We've also lost all sense of societal responsibility. Remember back when everyone's Mom basically looked out for what EVERY kid was doing in the neighborhood, and neighbors acted accordingly? Lots has changed, and yes, firearm availablity is just one issue to deal with out of a host of societal ills. Still, ignoring the issue of far-too-ready, irresponsible gun transfers, is every bit as irresponsible to your greater society as many of the other core issues.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 8:47 am

So you can name a bunch of social issues which lead to more people than ever going crazy and shooting up public spaces, but you only ever talk about taking away the guns instead of fixing the social issues. Like, the narrative of the control crowd is starting to ring pretty hollow, the laser focus on guns and only on guns is starting to leave the impression they couldn't care less about the greater social issues. Can't be bothered with fixing the hard problems, or even worse, the hard problems are too valuable as political tools to even contemplate actually fixing them.

I'm pretty sure if politicians actually fixed the underlying social issues, getting rid of the guns afterwards would take practically zero effort. Because right now the problem is self-reinforcing, the people who want guns feel they need them in order to combat the lunatics who already have them. But if you solve the problem of people turning lunatic in the first place, the gun people won't feel the need anymore and will more than likely sell if the government offered a reasonable buy-back program.

So basically, fix the economy, fix the ever growing income disparity, fix education and healthcare, and put the country back on a sustainable course that the overwhelming majority of people can believe in. Once you get that done, you will have dramatically less resistance getting rid of the guns. Otherwise, for as long as the constantly sinking working class can harbor a reasonable suspicion of looming economic and societal collapse from everything getting way too top heavy, they will as the saying goes: "stick to their guns".

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 9:12 am

Fish begins to stink at the head. The American ruling elite today can not change the situation in their country, even if they want it. Political leaders, military generals, electoral college are hostages to a corrupt system of governance. Only time can solve this problem..

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 10:55 am

You can tell Krom likes slick…first he chastises him…then he throws him a bone to pick up and run with.

But seriously, if you want to cure the ills of society, you must first learn how to tell the difference between the illness and the symptoms.

The left can properly identify some of them, but the right is blind and in denial to those, and the right can properly identify some of them, but the left is blind and in denial as well, but the biggest problem is neither side can properly identify most of them, and is too busy blaming the other side for everything.

For the most part in this country we won’t admit where the real problems are, because it involves looking in a mirror.

Vander · Post by **Vander** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 11:54 am

Now is not the time to discuss gun control. You're too emotional. I'll let you know when the time is right.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 4:46 pm

We already have gun control

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:43 pm

Slick's mantra is always the same: "sensible reform of gun laws." I don't see why any of you have a problem with this. We've made sensible laws regarding alcohol & automobiles and the results are good. Death and injury have gone down, but just because they haven't been eliminated doesn't mean they don't work. The same can be true of gun control if any of you could just get over yourself a little bit.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 5:33 am

The problem is not the guns. What we really need is common sense cultural control. Perhaps we could start by requiring a license and background checks to buy violent video games. Mental health issues may be developing by people who want to play such games. I mean what normal sane individual wants to create flying body parts and dismemberment? So we could start by monitoring such people. Then we could move on to the movie industry and their graphic realism scenes.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:01 am

woodchip wrote:The problem is not the guns. What we really need is common sense cultural control. Perhaps we could start by requiring a license and background checks to buy violent video games. Mental health issues may be developing by people who want to play such games. I mean what normal sane individual wants to create flying body parts and dismemberment? So we could start by monitoring such people. Then we could move on to the movie industry and their graphic realism scenes.

I'm sure that 58 year old drifter from 'Bama played a lot of video games.

deflect, deflect, deflect. So long as you make the claim in red above, you are part of our nation's problem. Yes, the guns are a problem: their ready availability, lack of oversight about transfer, the mindset of the public about them, everything.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:33 am

.....because this response, all the time, becomes idiotic:

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:02 am

callmeslick wrote:
I'm sure that 58 year old drifter from 'Bama played a lot of video games.

You know this as a fact? Or do you think people of a certain age don't play video games.

callmeslick wrote: deflect, deflect, deflect. So long as you make the claim in red above, you are part of our nation's problem. Yes, the guns are a problem: their ready availability, lack of oversight about transfer, the mindset of the public about them, everything.

The only deflection is you choosing the one guy who doesn't fit into the "young, white shooter" class. Go ahead and keep ignoring the real reasons as long as you can get your dream of a disarmed America.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:46 am

woodchip wrote:
callmeslick wrote:
I'm sure that 58 year old drifter from 'Bama played a lot of video games.
You know this as a fact? Or do you think people of a certain age don't play video games.

dodgeball, anyone?

callmeslick wrote: deflect, deflect, deflect. So long as you make the claim in red above, you are part of our nation's problem. Yes, the guns are a problem: their ready availability, lack of oversight about transfer, the mindset of the public about them, everything.

The only deflection is you choosing the one guy who doesn't fit into the "young, white shooter" class. Go ahead and keep ignoring the real reasons as long as you can get your dream of a disarmed America.

the guy in Tennessee wasn't white, but WAS mentally unstable, with substance issues. Most all of them have mental issues, many of those have extensive records. Go back to the VA Tech shooter, who'd been briefly committed prior to gun purchase. The issue you're ducking is the woeful status of pre-purchase screening, especially around mental health.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:08 am

How did this guy get a gun? He lied on the background check form, and apparently that's not taken seriously.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden ... nd-checks/

Let's make more laws instead of enforcing the existing ones. Brilliant!

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:50 am

Lothar wrote:How did this guy get a gun? He lied on the background check form, and apparently that's not taken seriously.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden ... nd-checks/

Let's make more laws instead of enforcing the existing ones. Brilliant!

I don't know if you've been reading my posts on the matter over time, but one of my key beefs is that the whole system of BG checks isn't funded or staffed adequately to do the job. So, I agree, let's enforce what is on the books, AGGRESSIVELY! But, for that project, we need your help(and that of other gun owners). Write the NRA and tell them to cease, immediately, their 25 year campaign to block all funding and personnel appointments for ATF enforcement. Tell them to support the funding for a far more robust information network around criminal and mental health history. Tell them to allow physicians and researchers to study gun violence so as to better understand who shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. And, so on.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:20 am

callmeslick wrote:dodgeball, anyone?

No coherent reply so lets throw the dodgeball meme instead

callmeslick wrote:the guy in Tennessee wasn't white, but WAS mentally unstable, with substance issues. Most all of them have mental issues, many of those have extensive records. Go back to the VA Tech shooter, who'd been briefly committed prior to gun purchase. The issue you're ducking is the woeful status of pre-purchase screening, especially around mental health.

Sure, lets go down the mental health check up. We've had discussions about this before and there are a lot of negatives to it. I'd like to see all politicians be required to have a mental health check up before they run for office. How likely do you think that will happen. Again I see you are cherry picking incidents to desperately prove your point.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:22 am

callmeslick wrote:

I don't know if you've been reading my posts on the matter over time, but one of my key beefs is that the whole system of BG checks isn't funded or staffed adequately to do the job. So, I agree, let's enforce what is on the books, AGGRESSIVELY! But, for that project, we need your help(and that of other gun owners). Write the NRA and tell them to cease, immediately, their 25 year campaign to block all funding and personnel appointments for ATF enforcement. Tell them to support the funding for a far more robust information network around criminal and mental health history. Tell them to allow physicians and researchers to study gun violence so as to better understand who shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. And, so on.

Yeah, lets blame the NRA. Why didn't Obama do just that when the Dems controlled everything. Or maybe he could pull his executive order pen from his hip pocket and bypass congress altogether

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:33 am

callmeslick wrote:So, I agree, let's enforce what is on the books, AGGRESSIVELY!

Great! Stop complaining about open/concealed carry and posting stupid memes and comics about the NRA and gun-free zones, and push for this instead.

we need your help(and that of other gun owners). Write the NRA

I'm not a gun owner. And, because of my membership in a pacifist religion, I doubt the NRA would consider me to be a part of their core constituency to be listened to. You've said you actually own some guns, so it seems to me like you should take the lead on this one.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 11:12 am

suppose you are correct on the last part, but you do bring some perspective to the table. The NRA ought to appreciate that.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 11:28 am

I appreciate how the ATF ran guns to the Mexican cartels also. Maybe they need even more defunding.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 12:52 pm

I have no idea why I should write a letter to an organization that I neither support financially or otherwise, does not speak for me and really want nothing to do with.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 2:39 pm

woodchip wrote:I appreciate how the ATF ran guns to the Mexican cartels also. Maybe they need even more defunding.

keep drinking the Kool Aid. Your handlers love it when you do so. And, more little kids, innocent theater goers and unarmed soldiers die.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 2:42 pm

Also Fearless Leader ought to be comforted that under his leadership:

"The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is reporting that gun production has more than doubled during the Obama presidency, increasing “140 percent.”

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 2:50 pm

Fear Sells, especially when the customers are that stupid

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 2:54 pm

The only fear is the left continually promoting gun confiscation.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 3:02 pm

woodchip wrote:The only fear is the left continually promoting gun confiscation.

d
which they haven't, especially the leadership. Unreasonable fear of Obama is the refuge of the stupid, and, like I said, stupidity sells guns.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 4:03 pm

This conceal carry gun owner was prolly one of the stupid ones also. I mean daring to defend a woman and her child must be the height of stupidity to those on the gun grabbing left.:

"A 62-year-old man with a gun in each hand fired at four people – including a 1-year-old boy – before a civilian with a concealed carry permit returned fire and wounded the shooter,"

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 4:06 pm

man! Another 62 year old product of violent video games? In the same week?

(somewhere along the way, one would think that the concept of needing a second shooter to counteract the first one is beyond fecked up)

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 4:59 pm

callmeslick wrote:
(somewhere along the way, one would think that the concept of needing a second shooter to counteract the first one is beyond fecked up)

I guess if it was your kid being shot at, you would of told the defender to put his pistol away and wait for the cops to arrive...speak about fecked up.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:06 pm

woodchip wrote:
callmeslick wrote:
(somewhere along the way, one would think that the concept of needing a second shooter to counteract the first one is beyond fecked up)
I guess if it was your kid being shot at, you would of told the defender to put his pistol away and wait for the cops to arrive...speak about fecked up.

no, I would realize that BOTH of them are fecked up and so was my society that I live in.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:08 pm

callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:The only fear is the left continually promoting gun confiscation.
d
which they haven't, especially the leadership. Unreasonable fear of Obama is the refuge of the stupid, and, like I said, stupidity sells guns.

Yeah that's why gun confiscation of social security recipients is made up by the NRA eh.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:15 pm

woodchip wrote:
callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:The only fear is the left continually promoting gun confiscation.
d
which they haven't, especially the leadership. Unreasonable fear of Obama is the refuge of the stupid, and, like I said, stupidity sells guns.
Yeah that's why gun confiscation of social security recipients is made up by the NRA eh.

really, try not to lie to our faces. No one is linking anything to mere Social Security recipients. It is to those elderly folks unable to care for their own selves in the simplest tasks. However, that is a great example of your handlers feeding you lies and exaggerations so that you(their willing, bootlicking lackey) can repeat the lies on the 'net. Further encouraging gun sales, which is what your handlers are trying to keep on the increase. Meanwhile, your nation and fellow citizens pay the price. Have no fear, the end of the run is coming, and likely sooner than you suspect.