(12-16-2011, 03:03 PM)Maggot Wrote: Both spellings are correct simpleton.

shariah

That still doesn't change the fact it is a subject which you obviously know fuck all about.

I am used to blowhard retards such as yourself spout worthless opinions about subjects they know nothing about.

We call this the "dick effect".

(12-16-2011, 02:43 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 12:41 PM)Middle Finger Wrote: It's always funny to see someone from England come out against private ownership of firearms, and therefore against the people having the balance of power and responsibility for their own Government, freedom, and safety. It's funny not just because firearms helped free us from England's tyranny, but because it's funny to see the subject mentality being utilized even until this day.

Not as funny as the obvious link between the availibility of firearms and its direct link to firearm related crime which we see in evidence in the US year after year after year after year..........

But MUCH funnier than someone pretending that firearms cause crime. But NOT as funny as someone that ignorant of the statistics regarding legal firearm ownership OR as ignorant regarding the greater availability of firearms in the past (you could buy them through mail order when I was a kid)! Hint: increases in crime are due to other social factors, not objects (firearms, swords, poison, knives, bats, etc).

(12-16-2011, 03:09 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 03:03 PM)Maggot Wrote: Both spellings are correct simpleton.

shariah

That still doesn't change the fact it is a subject which you obviously know fuck all about.

I am used to blowhard retards such as yourself spout worthless opinions about subjects they know nothing about.

We call this the "dick effect".

Well then you should come clean and admit that you are not for the right of effective self-defense, and know fuck about the responsibility for your own safety and freedom. You do, after all, expect the elderly to use karate or look for a cell phone, make a call, and wait as "their right to effective self-defense" from the 250 pound home invader and his buddy.

(12-16-2011, 03:19 PM)Middle Finger Wrote: But MUCH funnier than someone pretending that firearms cause crime. But NOT as funny as someone that ignorant of the statistics regarding legal firearm ownership OR as ignorant regarding the greater availability of firearms in the past (you could buy them through mail order when I was a kid)! Hint: increases in crime are due to other social factors, not objects (firearms, swords, poison, knives, bats, etc).

Proliferation of firearms causes firearms crime.

This is a fact, the fact you feel the need to have a gun and I don't speaks volumes.

(12-16-2011, 03:23 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 03:19 PM)Middle Finger Wrote: But MUCH funnier than someone pretending that firearms cause crime. But NOT as funny as someone that ignorant of the statistics regarding legal firearm ownership OR as ignorant regarding the greater availability of firearms in the past (you could buy them through mail order when I was a kid)! Hint: increases in crime are due to other social factors, not objects (firearms, swords, poison, knives, bats, etc).

Proliferation of firearms causes firearms crime.

This is a fact, the fact you feel the need to have a gun and I don't speaks volumes.

You better call the cops regarding the proliferation of suicide-causing ropes and murder-producing knives at the home improvement store nearest you.

One day, hopefully, you'll realize that people are going to murder and steal whether or not swords, guns, and bats are legal. It's up to you whether you want to be a more helpless and defenseless subject, or a more responsible and prepared individual. I think we can both agree that the American experiment in individual responsibility, including the tools needed to uphold that, has turned out quite well. I think we can also agree that England has been on quite a different track these last 250 years.

CN, don't you think that criminals will just use another weapon if they don't have a gun? You can't blame the weapon, it's the person using it. Don't you think a person has the right to defend their home and family with a gun if an intruder breaks into your home with a gun? Or robs you on the street with a gun? Don't you think that Dr. Petit should have had the right to shoot the mf'ers that raped, tortured, and murdered his family? You can't blame crime and murder on a gun or any other weapon. The blame lies with the person using it.

The proliferation of British people in the UK must be causing more crimes. See chart below. By the way, since the infamous gun ban your crime rate has gone up and your knife crime has skyrocketed. I guess you should start campaigning to end the proliferation of steak knives. That will surely fix the crime rate, then. Right? Dope.

The guns in my house are strictly for shooting people.

Don't you dare be critical of my cooking.

(12-16-2011, 03:09 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 03:03 PM)Maggot Wrote: Both spellings are correct simpleton.

shariah

That still doesn't change the fact it is a subject which you obviously know fuck all about.

I am used to blowhard retards such as yourself spout worthless opinions about subjects they know nothing about.

We call this the "dick effect".

Are you speaking as "Irene" today? When you say "we" I begin to imagine a giant concave mirror above the computer screen and you staring at it.

(12-16-2011, 03:29 PM)ramseycat Wrote: CN, don't you think that criminals will just use another weapon if they don't have a gun? You can't blame the weapon, it's the person using it. Don't you think a person has the right to defend their home and family with a gun if an intruder breaks into your home with a gun? Or robs you on the street with a gun? Don't you think that Dr. Petit should have had the right to shoot the mf'ers that raped, tortured, and murdered his family? You can't blame crime and murder on a gun or any other weapon. The blame lies with the person using it.

Filling your post with a bunch of questions makes you look timid and weak. j/s.

(12-16-2011, 03:37 PM)Duchess Wrote:

Don't you dare be critical of my cooking.

No worries. It's hard to fuck up a bowl of Campbell's soup.

Well...did you know that shit can boil dry like potatoes do?

(12-16-2011, 04:00 PM)username Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 03:29 PM)ramseycat Wrote: CN, don't you think that criminals will just use another weapon if they don't have a gun? You can't blame the weapon, it's the person using it. Don't you think a person has the right to defend their home and family with a gun if an intruder breaks into your home with a gun? Or robs you on the street with a gun? Don't you think that Dr. Petit should have had the right to shoot the mf'ers that raped, tortured, and murdered his family? You can't blame crime and murder on a gun or any other weapon. The blame lies with the person using it.

Filling your post with a bunch of questions makes you look timid and weak. j/s.

I disagree. I want to know his thoughts.

For all you gun-lovers, let me ask something.

Would the psycho at Virginia Tech in 2007 have been able to take out more than 30 people if was armed with steak knives? Or ropes? Or foul language?

Didn't think so.

I'm pro firearms. I've served in the military. I've handled weapons.

Don't for one FUCKING minute tell me that crime would be just as bad if guns were no longer available.

Complete bullshit.

(12-16-2011, 04:46 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Would the psycho at Virginia Tech in 2007 have been able to take out more than 30 people if was armed with steak knives? Or ropes? Or foul language?

Dick (in all of his glorious, twisted logic) will tell you that if all of those students had just been packing, they could have shot back.

(12-16-2011, 05:01 PM)username Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 04:46 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Would the psycho at Virginia Tech in 2007 have been able to take out more than 30 people if was armed with steak knives? Or ropes? Or foul language?

Dick (in all of his glorious, twisted logic) will tell you that if all of those students had just been packing, they could have shot back.

Gun advocates are fine. I just get tired of the frothing at the mouth from them about someone (me) choosing NOT to pack heat.

Guns... not knives, not rocks, not scissors, not harsh language, make crime so much easier for criminals.

All the school mass murders, fast food restaurant mass murders, subway (at least in this country) mass murders, etc. are the product of firearms.

Please enlighten me if I'm wrong.

While guns exist, you have a much better chance of being shot like Congresswoman Giffords at a public event, than being killed by a home-invader.

(12-16-2011, 05:01 PM)username Wrote:

(12-16-2011, 04:46 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Would the psycho at Virginia Tech in 2007 have been able to take out more than 30 people if was armed with steak knives? Or ropes? Or foul language?

Dick (in all of his glorious, twisted logic) will tell you that if all of those students had just been packing, they could have shot back.

I wish the teachers did at least.

(12-16-2011, 12:26 PM)username Wrote: Dear pyropappy,

Good job sticking some fairly uncommon words in to your post but the only grade you'll get in Mock is Fail.

Please return to writing like a normal person.

Sincerely,

User

Fuck you, that plain enough you dolt. Just because you don't know what they mean doesn't mean I don't; I will use words as I see fit.

(12-16-2011, 05:12 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Please enlighten me if I'm wrong.

⁹⁄₁₁ ~ box cutters and planes.

Charles Manson's loonies used knives.

Moms drown their kids or choke them.

Oklahoma City, bomb made with fertilizer.

I could go on...

I would rather be shot than stabbed if I had a choice in the matter.