1. Guyver says:

    Hell no!

  2. oldman says:

    I support the government to ban and confiscate bombs.

    • orchidcup says:

      I agree. The Constitution does not protect the right to have bombs.

      The Second Amendment pertains to guns.

  3. bobbo, neutering gun nuts with their own lack of ammunition says:

    deegee after only a quick scan providing the best response in months, but lets see how it stands up to Fisking says:
    4/15/2013 at 10:51 am

    bobbo said:

    “Do you believe or not believe the Stat that a gun in the home is more likely to be used against a member of the Home than against an intruder?”

    It is true, so why would it matter if I believe it.”

    Stats can be cherry-picked to say anything they want to. /// Not really. this is a lie that sounds like a truth only because it is too often repeated and sometime partially true “in a way” but ==not really. People do lie and manipulate about everything but the truth is still out there. Stats do not lie, only people lie. Stats are more misunderstood than wrong. Cherry picking is the evil, not the stat. so, let us continue…….

    The huge majority of gun related murders are gang related. // Now, is that cherrypicking or spin? In either case,…..so what? Gang related murders make entire neighborhoods/parts of town unsafe to even transit by car, much less walk around. Makes the barrio unsafe for “everyone” given collateral damage. The actual gang members involved are people too. What a racist, classists, niggardly thing to say and think much less argue with. Sadly, I agree with you. Still===this argument says NOTHING about the non-gang murders which is what gun control is all about. You make a distinction without meaning.

    The number of home invasions and break-ins is smaller in areas where home owners are allowed to own guns. // I’ve never seen a link to support that. But lets say its true.

    So the likelihood that your gun would be used against an invader becomes statistically smaller. /// OK–but the stat remains that guns in homes are still more likely to be used against home occupants than intruders and there are many links to that stat. Many homes are invaded without death or harm to the occupants. its the guns that kill people once again.

    So let’s cherry-pick that “stat” to show our agenda…

    This “stat” is EXACTLY the same kind of idiotic stat as having a swimming pool at your home has a higher statistical rate of child drowning. /// Ha, ha. Very Good deegee. It took me .5 seconds to catch the error. Because you are right=====>>>>and that is why one should not install a pool to prevent burglaries. Silly boy. Also note the rules that have been put into place to prevent child drownings like fences and gates. Lock boxes and finger print controls over home based firearms would be the analogy there.

    In our modern moronic pampered society, no one wants to take the blame for their mistakes, schools don’t grade children, sports games don’t keep score, all because we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings or “oppress” anyone for any little thing, even if it is their fault. /// Your point here escapes me.

    Let’s blame owning a swimming pool for the cause of death (instead of the real causes, typically improper parental care or child training). /// Your swimming pool cannot be used to kill me. Your thinking is off in the deep end without an exit ladder.

    And let’s blame owning a gun for the cause of some idiot who happens to use it as their means to hurt another. /// Thats what we are saying. Ha, ha!—ok, I shouldn’t take advantage of your rush to post. Responding to what you “meant:”==the goal/agenda of gun control is not to punish but rather to prevent the murder of innocent people. Keep your eye on the ball.

    And for the record, in countries where firearms are banned or heavily restricted, you are more likely to be attacked by someone with a large knife. /// GAWD–like flies to a shit pile you gunnuts are on this meme. Just yesterday in the USA (not as in China repeatedly) some knife nut did attack a dozen or so people. The telling result: lots of injuries===NO DEATHS. Seems to me this argument speaks against your position. So much for cherry picking.

    Which is why in countries like the UK there are groups who now want kitchen knives banned as well. /// So what? ARE kitchen knives going to be banned? If I have to ban kitchen knives to get the guns, I say…. lets go.

    If you agree with the direction of this type of thinking, where working down through banning anything and everything that may be used as a weapon will eventually stop all crime and turn the world in a loving place filled with rainbows and unicorns, then you really should get some professional help. //// I agree that individuals can get pretty issue driven. How to stop such excesses?/////////Oh!==how about MAJORITY WILL. You know==as your single issue gun nuttery is revealed by the MAJORITY WILL wanting gun regulations. Another excellent argument that actually cuts, or on topic blows away, your position.

    Well deegee=====the best argued post in months and in each and every point made you are a total failure.

    And so it goes……………………………

  4. orchidcup says:

    No matter how many petitions are circulated and signed, such activity will have zero effect on the Second Amendment.

    There is a prescribed method in the Constitution for the repeal of a constitutional amendment.

    Signing a petition is not one of them.

    Go ahead and sign your petitions while I laugh.

    Silly Hoomans.

  5. MikeN says:

    Toomey-Manchin background check bill doesn’t have the votes. Now the Democrats are going to switch their votes to no to pretend like they support the 2nd Amendment.

  6. stephen Hines says:

    The experts agree, GUN CONTROL WORKS!

    Just ask: Adolph Hitler, Fidel Castro, Muammar al-gadafi, Joseph Stalin, Idi Amin, Mao Zedong, Pol pot, Kim Jong-il.

    Of course I voted “NO”. It’s not only about guns. It’s our freedom………………..What Constitution? I think we would find out very quickly.