Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1061920]Yeah, we know he gets info from shady sources, like those that count gang-banger teenagers as "children". But when I consider the implication of G1's numbers, that all those regrettable deaths, a lot of them suicides, only happened because a gun was available.... :doh:[/quote]



Why was a gun available ?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1062231]Why was a gun available ?[/quote]Because guns serve useful purposes, such as self defense, hunting and other sport, and are a constitutional power of the people.

Some people just don't get that.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1062236]Because guns serve useful purposes, such as self defense, hunting and other sport, and are a constitutional power of the people.

Some people just don't get that.[/quote]


wow , nice try on the spin .WHY where guns available for kids to commit suicide and where did you get the numbers that they were a suicide ?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1062310]wow , nice try on the spin .WHY where guns available for kids to commit suicide and where did you get the numbers that they were a suicide ?[/quote]Sigh, why don't you stop trying to spin things. Your spin is the reason for your massive disconnect between what people have told you, and your responses.

I said you cite sources that count teenaged gangbangers as "children", and that a lot of gun deaths are suicides. What I guess I have to spell out for you, is that in counting all gun deaths without thought, you count suicides which would probably have happened even if guns didn't exist. But that would require critical thinking, like questioning the "children" numbers.

Read post #437. And realize RR and I were responding to your last post at the time #435. At least stop trying to spin things to put words in people's mouths.

Another recent example of your disconnect with what people are saying: Read post #796 in the Pics For Sharing & Debating thread. Try to follow arguments while debating.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1062314]Sigh, why don't you stop trying to spin things. Your spin is the reason for your massive disconnect between what people have told you, and your responses.

I said you cite sources that count teenaged gangbangers as "children", and that a lot of gun deaths are suicides. What I guess I have to spell out for you, is that in counting all gun deaths without thought, you count suicides which would probably have happened even if guns didn't exist. But that would require critical thinking, like questioning the "children" numbers.

Read post #437. And realize RR and I were responding to your last post at the time #435. At least stop trying to spin things to put words in people's mouths.

Another recent example of your disconnect with what people are saying: Read post #796 in the Pics For Sharing & Debating thread. Try to follow arguments while debating.[/quote]


Thank God ,you prove my point .What I'm trying to point out and either you are ignoring it or chose to spin it yourself is that the guns deaths that were suicides ,these kids should not have be able to get to guns .Like it or not just because you call someone a "gang banger" doesn't me there aren't children some are 12 and 13.Seems you and Rat don't like something so there for it is wrong or doesn't exist, you are so pro gun you're blind to simple gun safety, laws people want no one is taking you guns so you can take that cry and cram it .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

And now in English, please?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1062682]Thank God ,you prove my point .What I'm trying to point out and either you are ignoring it or chose to spin it yourself is that the guns deaths that were suicides ,[B]these kids should not have be able to get to guns[/B] .Like it or not just because you call someone a "gang banger" doesn't me there aren't children some are 12 and 13.Seems you and Rat don't like something so there for it is wrong or doesn't exist, you are so pro gun you're blind to simple gun safety, laws people want no one is taking you guns so you can take that cry and cram it .[/quote]Sifting through your spin and lack of any point, and trying to twist what I said (for example, show of hands: anyone other than G1 think I was saying the children's deaths were suicides?) I bolded the only thing on topic. The answer, to the problem you state, is enforcing existing laws regarding gun ownership and child endangerment, and education. Example here: [URL="http://www.gac.20m.com/guide.htm"]LINK[/URL]. Particularly the section "A Parent's Guide to Gun Safety".

Oh, and one more thing.

[quote=Giantone;1062682](snip) no one is taking you guns so you can take that cry and cram it .[/quote]

Explain your post here.

[quote=Giantone;988988]Done deal.Maryland next

New York passes nation's toughest gun control law | NJ.com

York state enacted the nation's toughest gun restrictions today and the first since the Connecticut school massacre, including an expanded assault-weapon ban and background checks for buying ammunition.
Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the measure into law less than an hour after it won final passage in the Legislature, with supporters hailing it as a model for the nation and gun-rights activists condemning it as a knee-jerk piece of legislation that won't make anyone safer and is too extreme to win support in the rest of the country.
"Common sense can win," Cuomo said. "You can overpower the extremists with intelligence and with reason and with common sense."[/quote]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1062988]Sifting through your spin and lack of any point, and trying to twist what I said (for example, show of hands: anyone other than G1 think I was saying the children's deaths were suicides?) .[/quote]


This is your quote "Yeah, we know he gets info from shady sources, like those that count gang-banger teenagers as "children". But when I consider the implication of G1's numbers, that all those regrettable deaths, a lot of them suicides, only happened because a gun was available.... "

Not much for me to spin jr.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1063037]This is your quote "Yeah, we know he gets info from shady sources, like those that count gang-banger teenagers as "children". But when I consider the implication of G1's numbers, that all those regrettable deaths, a lot of them suicides, only happened because a gun was available.... "

Not much for me to spin jr.[/quote]Lol, you just keep proving your ignorance on gun control and basic reading comprehension. You really don't get that I was referring to your illogic‎ concerning your sources counting teenage gang activities as "children's deaths", AND an illogical assumption when total "gun deaths" are cited, which includes suicides, that not having a gun would have prevented those deaths. [URL="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/"]Relevant link[/URL]

I mean, do you even realize which "numbers" I was referring to, in my post you cite? (relevant: posts 435-437) Sure, I meant your posts in general, but this is further proof you can't even follow a line of thought!

Keep spinning, G1. Keep proving that insults and lies are all you have left.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1063074]

Keep spinning, G1. Keep proving that insults and lies are all you have left.[/quote]

They are called facts but it isn't the first time I have corrected you ,have a good day .




[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=EANa4vaIViPrSM&tbnid=jjq3ZfLMHxLVgM:&ved=0CAYQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsightingsat60.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F12%2Fgun-safety-not-gun-control.html&ei=PXogU-e8NsijkQfNqoCoBA&bvm=bv.62788935,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNHPKY15l3mFhjFMDGB2PGApLMvxhw&ust=1394723772703058"][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT-QXILCQoPeIGUHPea7AMCmarouC_YMSrymOPiOwc9Fgx4oZQ[/IMG][/URL]


[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=EANa4vaIViPrSM&tbnid=jjq3ZfLMHxLVgM:&ved=0CAYQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2F10022185778&ei=I3sgU6HsHI-kkQf2vYHQDw&bvm=bv.62788935,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNFXeZUvBEd51hhBeZNt__SViV2pew&ust=1394724002006337"][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRMtjfxDnMlXfac5LB-9_W_GHdVWeyqN71wxeio7TZsDFCnQxic[/IMG][/URL]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1063151]They are called facts but it isn't the first time I have corrected you ,have a good day .

[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=EANa4vaIViPrSM&tbnid=jjq3ZfLMHxLVgM:&ved=0CAYQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsightingsat60.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F12%2Fgun-safety-not-gun-control.html&ei=PXogU-e8NsijkQfNqoCoBA&bvm=bv.62788935,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNHPKY15l3mFhjFMDGB2PGApLMvxhw&ust=1394723772703058"][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT-QXILCQoPeIGUHPea7AMCmarouC_YMSrymOPiOwc9Fgx4oZQ[/IMG][/URL]
[/quote]


[url=http://www.madd.org/blog/2013/november/2012-drunk-driving-fatalities.html]MADD - 2012 Drunk Driving Fatalities by State[/url]


9,865 deaths by drunk driving in 2012 and still no change in regulation of alcohol.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

What do we need to ban after this crime? Feminists or liberal professors?


Just heard about it on the news and looked it up...

[url=http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/16673/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thecollegefixfeed+%28The+College+Fix%29]Feminist Studies Professor Accused of Assaulting Teenage Prolife Demonstrator[/url]


[QUOTE][B]A department of feminist studies professor has been accused of going berserk [/B]after coming across a campus prolife demonstration that used extremely graphic displays, leading a small mob of students to chant “tear down the sign” before grabbing one of the signs, storming off with it, [B]then allegedly engaging in an altercation with a 16-year-old[/B] prolife protestor who had followed the educator to retrieve it.

Much of the scuffle was recorded on a smartphone by the 16-year-old, Thrin Short. The yet-to-be-released video is now in the custody of Santa Barbara law enforcement officials, who are investigating the March 4 incident.
[B]
The professor at the heart of the controversy is Mireille Miller-Young, an associate professor whose area of emphasis is black cultural studies, pornography and sex work, according to her faculty webpage. [/B]

[url=http://www.femst.ucsb.edu/people/academic/mireille-miller-young]Mireille Miller-Young | Department of Feminist Studies - UC Santa Barbara[/url]

[/QUOTE]




Ahhh, tolerance and diversity of thought are alive and well with the Left!



Seriously though, WHY are those studies even available at colleges? No wonder so many come out of college with formal educations but no employable skillsets.

Feminist & Queer Theory?
Pornography?
Sex Work?
Black Film?
African American & African Diaspora Studies?
Pop Culture and Art?
Oral History? Don't even want a course description there...


That's definitely worth $200,000 in debt.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1063074]Lol, [B]you just keep proving your ignorance on gun control and basic reading comprehension[/B]. You really don't get that I was referring to your illogic‎ concerning your sources counting teenage gang activities as "children's deaths", AND an illogical assumption when total "gun deaths" are cited, which includes suicides, that not having a gun would have prevented those deaths. [URL="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/"]Relevant link[/URL]

I mean, do you even realize which "numbers" I was referring to, in my post you cite? (relevant: posts 435-437) Sure, I meant your posts in general, but this is further proof you can't even follow a line of thought!

Keep spinning, G1. Keep proving that insults and lies are all you have left.[/quote]
I am convinced that G1 struggles with basic reading comprehension skills. He often talks himself in circles, and misquotes or misrepresents quotes from others, sometimes in the same paragraph! There definitely needs to be a warning label on his posts cautioning against possible headaches and confusion. I just wonder if there should be a law that you have to wait an hour to drive after reading his posts.

Anyone going to the Crossroads of the West gun show in the OC this weekend? I'll be wearing a Redskins T-shirt. Say "Hi" if you see me.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1063151]They are called facts but it isn't the first time I have corrected you ,have a good day .

(snip)[/quote]Another illogical post of yours, already corrected by another poster.

It isn't the first time you've corrected me, G1. You've NEVER been able to "correct" me at all.

Here's an example of "correcting". Let's go back to something I said you ignored earlier:

[quote=HailGreen28;1062988]Oh, and one more thing.

[quote=Giantone;1062682](snip) no one is taking you guns so you can take that cry and cram it .[/quote]

Explain your post here.

[quote=Giantone;988988]Done deal.Maryland next

New York passes nation's toughest gun control law | NJ.com

York state enacted the nation's toughest gun restrictions today and the first since the Connecticut school massacre, including an expanded assault-weapon ban and background checks for buying ammunition.
Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the measure into law less than an hour after it won final passage in the Legislature, with supporters hailing it as a model for the nation and gun-rights activists condemning it as a knee-jerk piece of legislation that won't make anyone safer and is too extreme to win support in the rest of the country.
"Common sense can win," Cuomo said. "You can overpower the extremists with intelligence and with reason and with common sense."[/quote][/quote]

In a previous thread, you cheered passage of a law that bans some guns, so-called assault weapons and guns with "large capacity" magazines. And now you lie claiming that nobody's trying to take guns away.

That's me correcting you, G1. On people taking guns away, and on your own dishonesty. Whether you accept this rebuke or not.

HTTR, have a nice day.



edit: Yeah, CRedskinsRule, you're right. Ironically, he's got kind of a disclaimer in his sig, though I have a hard time believing he put it there himself. Unless that's even more dishonesty and deflection on his part, lol.