Helpful ReplyHot!Trump 2024

Page: << < ..2627282930.. > >> Showing page 29 of 34
Author
Porktown
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 9700
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/09/04 16:37:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/17 20:15:56 (permalink)
MyWar
Lots of people drive drunk all the time and manage to never get into a car accident. That doesn’t mean it’s safe or a good idea. It just means they got lucky.

What about buzzed driving though? The average woman drinking one drink and driving is rolling the dice of a $10K DUI. Not at all unsafe or bad idea.

I remember a kid in my school having a rifle in his truck in HS. Just like Snagr said, it was for hunting. But the school wasn’t very happy, police showed up and sent home for a couple days. The school was pretty cool about it, no doubt would be different now. They had the parents meet with the school board, principal, superintendent and basically, don’t do it again. They didn’t go crazy, well before the Columbine stuff. They explained that kids get in fights and don’t think things out. If that gun happens to be in sight someone might do something stupid. All seemed to agree with the explanation or at least said they did and kid was in school a day later. Maybe I’m a liberal or conservative independent…. But seems like the common sense the debate seems to be lacking now. Granted with all of the school shootings since then, taking a gun near a school has a whole new meaning.
MyWar
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1945
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2018/06/03 06:54:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/17 21:54:03 (permalink)
In my high school, early 90s, Catholic school in the city, there would have been serious consequences for any kid that brought a gun to school. Same would have been true for any of my friends that went to Pgh city schools.

The problem with guns in this country is that we have a major political party that is using this public safety issue to deliberately manipulate voters. And in doing so, these politicians are promoting dangerously illogical and stupid ideas like “the solution to gun violence is more guns”, and it’s making the problem worse.
ICE NUT
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1257
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2002/01/11 21:02:12
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 08:57:01 (permalink)
The last i heard it's the liberals and women doing most of the gun buying us so called Magas and conservatives already have them.The reason gun sales are climbing not for your so called party but people are in fear of rising crime everywhere esp women.and thats a result of your party policy's on prosecution correct.It also appears your president and his cult the more they talk about keeping guns out of everyday Americans hands the more sales go up the roof!!!!.
MyWar
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1945
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2018/06/03 06:54:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 10:00:09 (permalink)
ICE NUT
The last i heard it's the liberals and women doing most of the gun buying us so called Magas and conservatives already have them.


So just because you already have fishing gear, does that mean you don’t buy more?
ICE NUT
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1257
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2002/01/11 21:02:12
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 10:32:20 (permalink)
MyWar drink some more of the blue KOOLAID now who's not making any sense. I guess your not agreeing. that women and concerned citizens are doing the most gun buying huh.Just the magas and right wing nuts correct.What does fishing gear have to do with a women who fears for her safety in the new crime infested cities of bidums America?
snagr
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 504
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2020/06/23 12:24:34
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 12:57:11 (permalink)
MyWar

But the ideas expressed in this post are straight up bonkers.




It's bonkers that up until 25-30 years ago students could be trusted to have guns on school property and schools didn't get shot up?  
 
I went to a very suburban high school 20 miles from downtown Pittsburgh.  Big school.  Early 90's. Guns in gun racks of student and teacher trucks.  Guns in trunks and back seats of cars.  I had two teachers I hunted with after school a couple times.  I can remember a time or two where a few teachers would come out and take a look at a new or fancy gun before or after school.  
 
And nobody got shot.  
 
Just bonkers I tell ya.     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 13:21:23 (permalink)
 I found a photo of I Dream of Jeanne's belly button!!
 
  
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 13:30:52 (permalink)
 

Butler High Rifle Team
  · 


 



 
WPIAL champions

Congratulations team










 



 



 








 
post edited by crappiefisher - 2024/02/18 14:03:34
MyWar
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1945
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2018/06/03 06:54:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 17:11:33 (permalink)
snagr
MyWar

But the ideas expressed in this post are straight up bonkers.




It's bonkers that up until 25-30 years ago students could be trusted to have guns on school property and schools didn't get shot up?  
 
I went to a very suburban high school 20 miles from downtown Pittsburgh.  Big school.  Early 90's. Guns in gun racks of student and teacher trucks.  Guns in trunks and back seats of cars.  I had two teachers I hunted with after school a couple times.  I can remember a time or two where a few teachers would come out and take a look at a new or fancy gun before or after school.  
 
And nobody got shot.  
 
Just bonkers I tell ya.     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



So would it be fair to sum up your post as:

“The good old days, when kids brought guns to school”
pensfan1
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3427
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2004/01/13 15:58:23
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 17:41:15 (permalink)
Joe Biden's economy must not be that that bad, people can afford $400 for tRump sneakers. A quick math question, how many $400 pairs of shoes do you have to sell to make enough money to
cover $480M losses awarded in court cases? Btw, these look like someone covered Chuck Taylor's in gold lem`e and colored a flag on them with Crayola markers. Quite classy as only tRump can be🙄😅
post edited by pensfan1 - 2024/02/18 17:42:26
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 17:59:38 (permalink)
 Poor guy got booed 
 
 
 Made Porktown look for a belly button.
post edited by crappiefisher - 2024/02/18 18:30:03
DeadGator401
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 910
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2013/07/17 22:42:40
  • Status: online
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 21:22:13 (permalink)
It's wild at this point. Scumbags in KC had Assault Rifles. Literally hundreds of Armed police officers. "Good guys with guns will stop it!"

What we see here, anecdotal stores of "We took our hunting guns to school!" & "Everyone had guns back then!" 

Your hobbies aren't more important than children's lives. It's as simple as that. 


MyWar
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1945
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2018/06/03 06:54:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 21:57:45 (permalink)
First they come for your AR 15s

Then before you know it they come for your ned rigs and your wacky worms and your wooly burgers and your ice nits
post edited by MyWar - 2024/02/18 22:02:17
MyWar
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1945
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2018/06/03 06:54:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 22:04:13 (permalink)
You can pry my ned rig from my cold dead hands

You dirty apes
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4894
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 22:26:59 (permalink)
DeadGator401
It's wild at this point. Scumbags in KC had Assault Rifles. Literally hundreds of Armed police officers. "Good guys with guns will stop it!"

What we see here, anecdotal stores of "We took our hunting guns to school!" & "Everyone had guns back then!" 

Your hobbies aren't more important than children's lives. It's as simple as that. 




First off, if you want to be taken seriously in the least little bit by those who are pro gun, you simply cannot be completely wrong in your initial premise, because if you are, then your argument, no matter how good it might be, is dismissed out of hand because you don’t even know the basics.

“Scumbags in KC had assault rifles” is just straight up false. They did not. The had semi-auto rifles. If you frame your argument based on assault equals semi, that is akin to Mack Truck equals SmartCar. It is simply not true, in either case. By doing so, you are debating with emotions, but facts.

That aside,


Serious question — Did the law against juveniles buying ANY gun stop, because they cannot, the two involved in the KC shooting? If it did not, which, it did not, what new law would?

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
pensfan1
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3427
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2004/01/13 15:58:23
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 22:38:43 (permalink)
Tell us more Professor 🙄.
DeadGator401
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 910
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2013/07/17 22:42:40
  • Status: online
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 23:02:40 (permalink)
DarDys
DeadGator401
It's wild at this point. Scumbags in KC had Assault Rifles. Literally hundreds of Armed police officers. "Good guys with guns will stop it!"

What we see here, anecdotal stores of "We took our hunting guns to school!" & "Everyone had guns back then!" 

Your hobbies aren't more important than children's lives. It's as simple as that. 




First off, if you want to be taken seriously in the least little bit by those who are pro gun, you simply cannot be completely wrong in your initial premise, because if you are, then your argument, no matter how good it might be, is dismissed out of hand because you don’t even know the basics.

“Scumbags in KC had assault rifles” is just straight up false. They did not. The had semi-auto rifles. If you frame your argument based on assault equals semi, that is akin to Mack Truck equals SmartCar. It is simply not true, in either case. By doing so, you are debating with emotions, but facts.

That aside,


Serious question — Did the law against juveniles buying ANY gun stop, because they cannot, the two involved in the KC shooting? If it did not, which, it did not, what new law would?


I forgot to put the disclaimer of *I don't care about the technicality of "weLl AcHSuaLly It"S NoT ClaSsIfIed aS a AsSaUIlT RifLe BlaH BlaH"  type deals. 

It's been years on here Dardys. We've been down this road before, after other children were shot en masse. No minds get changed. It doesn't matter. To be blunt - I don't care about the opinions of those who value their hobbies over human lives. I also don't care if the same people take what I say seriously about the matter of gun control on a Fishing Board. 

Since you asked, it's all about mitigation. The guns are endemic in the US. That doesn't mean we should sit on our hands and instead say "Thoughts and Prayers!". 

Here's some ideas to pick apart - keeping in mind I do not currently write legislation at any level:
(This is for any gun that looks like it should be in Call Of Duty (any version after the 1960's eras in the games). That oughta cast a wide enough net so we don't get bogged down with some rigamorale of "Well actually only 17 rounds in a magazine equate to an assault rifle type stuff.)


  • Require a specific license to purchase said guns. Require yearly or bi-yearly mental health exam to keep license. 
    • Different Levels of Licensure for buying guns, with a waiting period that varies depending on level. Enthusiasts would likely be a higher level, therefore less wait. Regardless, a waiting period of at least 3 days.
  • Use funds for this (and other things) to fund a Federal Level Gun buyback program. Issue either tax credits or cash. No questions asked. Money Talks
  • Something else about tightening mental health and rules around who can buy a Call of Duty gun

And - because usually people who are going to commit gun violence don't tell people of their plans - it'll be very hard to tell how many mass shootings we'd avoid. Guess we'd just have to watch the TV and see if the timeframes between them lessens?

I'm tired. Maybe I'll think of more later.




JerryS
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 278
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/06/25 23:50:13
  • Location: N.W. PA
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/18 23:38:26 (permalink)
DarDys
DeadGator401
It's wild at this point. Scumbags in KC had Assault Rifles. Literally hundreds of Armed police officers. "Good guys with guns will stop it!"

What we see here, anecdotal stores of "We took our hunting guns to school!" & "Everyone had guns back then!" 

Your hobbies aren't more important than children's lives. It's as simple as that. 




First off, if you want to be taken seriously in the least little bit by those who are pro gun, you simply cannot be completely wrong in your initial premise, because if you are, then your argument, no matter how good it might be, is dismissed out of hand because you don’t even know the basics.

“Scumbags in KC had assault rifles” is just straight up false. They did not. The had semi-auto rifles. If you frame your argument based on assault equals semi, that is akin to Mack Truck equals SmartCar. It is simply not true, in either case. By doing so, you are debating with emotions, but facts.

That aside,


Serious question — Did the law against juveniles buying ANY gun stop, because they cannot, the two involved in the KC shooting? If it did not, which, it did not, what new law would?



If gun laws don't stop bad guys from getting guns, why haven't any of the mass shooters used an automatic assault rifle since their goal is to kill as many as possible?   Because they are heavily regulated and very hard to obtain. 
 
Your attempt to discredit DeadGator's argument based on an official army definition of an assault rifle is childish. To the public, a semi-auto with a 30-50 round magazine is an assault rifle since that is the main objective of the gun.  If you limit the capacity to 8 rounds you can use your other silly definition, Modern Sporting Rifle.  Get serious and stop relying on NRA propaganda.
post edited by JerryS - 2024/02/18 23:40:38
Porktown
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 9700
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/09/04 16:37:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/19 09:42:36 (permalink)
Navalny’s wife says she is now going to lead the fight against Putin. How long until she is given the E Jean Caroll treatment then disappear?
post edited by Porktown - 2024/02/19 13:25:52
Mitchell
Novice Angler
  • Total Posts : 82
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2023/10/06 09:41:03
  • Location: Freeport, Pa.
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/19 12:08:43 (permalink)
Porktown
Navalny’s wife says she is now going to lead the fight against Putin. How long until she is given the E Jean Caroll treatment then disappear? I wouldn’t doubt that Trump is offered sloppy seconds, while Vlad is balls deep in his mouth.



If Navalny's wife gains any traction at all, her survival will be in question. Putin has nothing but ill regard for anyone who goes against him. Remember, at least 6 people who verbally opposed his war on Ukraine found death by mysteriously falling out of 6th floor windows or off the roof of a hospital, and it is suspected that one of his generals was shot down and killed by a Russian missile, either from another plane or ground fired. This just in less of two years. Some of those killed were wealthy oligarchs able to influence opinion with status and money, and Putin can't have that 'cause the Russian people are already starting large protests. ('Course, many will be arrested and maybe some never heard from again).

Whenever you want to know what the Democrats are up to, watch what they accuse the other side of doing.
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/19 12:56:40 (permalink)
Any thoughts on can't buy a gun if have a medical  card compared to other medications or being a alcoholic?
pensfan1
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3427
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2004/01/13 15:58:23
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/19 19:20:55 (permalink)
I think it's BS , Crappie. There has NEVER been anyone accused of domestic violence while on reefer, I can take a guess on that. Good ol Mother Earth never made anyone want to go shoot up a school. If anything it makes people docile and harmless, jus say'IN. With booze you lose, with dope there's hope.
post edited by pensfan1 - 2024/02/19 21:25:15
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/19 19:47:04 (permalink)
 Seems there are a few shootings a week in or out in front of a bar a week on the local news.  
 
 Just lost my brother last week to booze.
pensfan1
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3427
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2004/01/13 15:58:23
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/19 21:25:40 (permalink)
Thas terrible. Sorry Crap
Porktown
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 9700
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/09/04 16:37:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/20 06:36:39 (permalink)
Condolences Chris.
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4894
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/20 08:57:56 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby psu_fish 2024/02/20 14:34:14
So, I got the expected responses to a factual statement and a simple question — a personal attack; a cognitive bias stereotype; and a dismissal of a basic definition based on emotion. This is typical of people who say they want to have a conversation, but instead want to lecture, without factual basis, and when confronted with an argument that they have no persuasive counterpoints to, resort to these tactics.

My occupation has nothing to do with the subject at hand any more than a response of “your Momma, poopy head, or go back to slicing cold cuts because you are full of bologna,” yet that was a personal attack because of not being able to construct a sensible retort.

The NRA comment is a projection of media driven stereotyping often used by those that need to paint an entire demographic rather than address a specific discussion point, quite often because no valid counterpoint is to be had. For the record, I am not currently, never have been, nor ever will be a NRA member, namely because of their stance on actual assault rifles, not the lookalikes. I do realize that those types of firearms appeal to some, just not me (full disclosure I have never fired even a semi lookalike and have no intention to do so, let alone the real deal), but I see no reason for the general public to own fully automatic firearms. If they want to go through the arduous process to get the tax stamp, because that is what it is, a tax stamp, not a license or permit, and can pass the criteria, then bully for them.

Please post when someone holding this level of tax stamp is involved in a shooting because it will be the first time.

The third response, which at least had some semblance of having a debate point solution, was at once the best response and the worst response. It was the best response in the sense that it went beyond the superficial to actually propose something (debated later), but that was far outweighed by the worst part of the response which was dismissing out of hand settling on a basic definition under the logic of “I don’t care” followed by childish writing meant to demean the original statement.

If one truly wants to have a debate, discussion, conversation on any subject — gun control, immigration, fossil fuels, sports — that needs to start with defining the basic terms. When one party refuses to acknowledge a simple definition, then there can be no back and forth because it is a one way telling, not a fact based exchange.

But, to look at the proposal, it can be characterized as “feel good” legislation on one hand and “a solution looking for a problem” on the other.

To state the obvious, no juvenile can purchase a gun legally now, yet the KC shooting involved two juveniles. In other words, they broke the law already on the books, yet the answer is to put another similar law on the books so that maybe those intent on doing harm might follow the new law?

Adding mental health checks in order to buy a gun, the having those checks be reapplied on an annual or semi-annual basis falls on four fronts — 1) criminals won’t be lining up to see the mental health specialist; 2) there are approximately 83 million legal gun owners in the US making this logistically impossible; 3) several of the latest mass shootings were conducted by those that already had a negative mental health diagnosis, yet illegally acquired a gun, so ineffectual as well, and 4) opens the door to a complete nanny state control. As an example, if annual or bi-annual mental health checks would be required for gun ownership, based on the number of deaths in mass shooting (75 by 12/6 in 2023), then would it not be reasonable to require breathalyzer ignition interlocks on all vehicles in the US because there were over 13,000 drunk driving deaths in the same time period?

With regard to no-questions-asked gun buy backs, this has been around for years in several cities, so the data is available. Please post when one functional AR platform has been bought back and taken off the street because it will be the first time. Pro gun people will not sell their firearms to these programs because, aside from wanting to keep their guns, the programs pay nowhere near the value of the gun. Criminals will not sell their firearms to these programs because they are the tools if their trade — can’t rob, gang bang for territory, protect the drug money, or, as in KC, settle “a personal dispute” (that’s what the MSM called it).

What is turned in are broken, old, no longer wanted (often by someone related to a now deceased owner) guns that are not involved in any criminal activity. Because there is an actual track record for the cities that have engaged in these programs it is fairly easy to ascertain that they have been ineffective in reducing violent crime in said same cities.

To end, because I expect nothing in the way of counterpoints, just more of the usual retorts, I have no answer either other than to start with the component other than the inanimate object that can do nothing without the shooter. Use a gun in any crime, 50 years, no plea bargaining down to a lesser crime, no possibility of parole, second offense automatic life sentence. There has to be a human disincentive and not applying the 20,000 gun laws on the books already doesn’t accomplish that. Neither will a new one.

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/20 11:36:56 (permalink)
Thanks guys.
MyWar
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1945
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2018/06/03 06:54:05
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/20 11:48:25 (permalink)
DarDys
So, I got the expected responses to a factual statement and a simple question — a personal attack; a cognitive bias stereotype; and a dismissal of a basic definition based on emotion. This is typical of people who say they want to have a conversation, but instead want to lecture, without factual basis, and when confronted with an argument that they have no persuasive counterpoints to, resort to these tactics.

My occupation has nothing to do with the subject at hand any more than a response of “your Momma, poopy head, or go back to slicing cold cuts because you are full of bologna,” yet that was a personal attack because of not being able to construct a sensible retort.

The NRA comment is a projection of media driven stereotyping often used by those that need to paint an entire demographic rather than address a specific discussion point, quite often because no valid counterpoint is to be had. For the record, I am not currently, never have been, nor ever will be a NRA member, namely because of their stance on actual assault rifles, not the lookalikes. I do realize that those types of firearms appeal to some, just not me (full disclosure I have never fired even a semi lookalike and have no intention to do so, let alone the real deal), but I see no reason for the general public to own fully automatic firearms. If they want to go through the arduous process to get the tax stamp, because that is what it is, a tax stamp, not a license or permit, and can pass the criteria, then bully for them.

Please post when someone holding this level of tax stamp is involved in a shooting because it will be the first time.

The third response, which at least had some semblance of having a debate point solution, was at once the best response and the worst response. It was the best response in the sense that it went beyond the superficial to actually propose something (debated later), but that was far outweighed by the worst part of the response which was dismissing out of hand settling on a basic definition under the logic of “I don’t care” followed by childish writing meant to demean the original statement.

If one truly wants to have a debate, discussion, conversation on any subject — gun control, immigration, fossil fuels, sports — that needs to start with defining the basic terms. When one party refuses to acknowledge a simple definition, then there can be no back and forth because it is a one way telling, not a fact based exchange.

But, to look at the proposal, it can be characterized as “feel good” legislation on one hand and “a solution looking for a problem” on the other.

To state the obvious, no juvenile can purchase a gun legally now, yet the KC shooting involved two juveniles. In other words, they broke the law already on the books, yet the answer is to put another similar law on the books so that maybe those intent on doing harm might follow the new law?

Adding mental health checks in order to buy a gun, the having those checks be reapplied on an annual or semi-annual basis falls on four fronts — 1) criminals won’t be lining up to see the mental health specialist; 2) there are approximately 83 million legal gun owners in the US making this logistically impossible; 3) several of the latest mass shootings were conducted by those that already had a negative mental health diagnosis, yet illegally acquired a gun, so ineffectual as well, and 4) opens the door to a complete nanny state control. As an example, if annual or bi-annual mental health checks would be required for gun ownership, based on the number of deaths in mass shooting (75 by 12/6 in 2023), then would it not be reasonable to require breathalyzer ignition interlocks on all vehicles in the US because there were over 13,000 drunk driving deaths in the same time period?

With regard to no-questions-asked gun buy backs, this has been around for years in several cities, so the data is available. Please post when one functional AR platform has been bought back and taken off the street because it will be the first time. Pro gun people will not sell their firearms to these programs because, aside from wanting to keep their guns, the programs pay nowhere near the value of the gun. Criminals will not sell their firearms to these programs because they are the tools if their trade — can’t rob, gang bang for territory, protect the drug money, or, as in KC, settle “a personal dispute” (that’s what the MSM called it).

What is turned in are broken, old, no longer wanted (often by someone related to a now deceased owner) guns that are not involved in any criminal activity. Because there is an actual track record for the cities that have engaged in these programs it is fairly easy to ascertain that they have been ineffective in reducing violent crime in said same cities.

To end, because I expect nothing in the way of counterpoints, just more of the usual retorts, I have no answer either other than to start with the component other than the inanimate object that can do nothing without the shooter. Use a gun in any crime, 50 years, no plea bargaining down to a lesser crime, no possibility of parole, second offense automatic life sentence. There has to be a human disincentive and not applying the 20,000 gun laws on the books already doesn’t accomplish that. Neither will a new one.


Oh please just save yourself some time and admit that your firearm fetish is more important to you than the lives of a bunch of people you don’t know. We all know that’s what it comes down to.
crappiefisher
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/20 12:04:41 (permalink)
 Any of you guys ever go to a Turkey shoot?
 
psu_fish
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3106
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2008/08/28 22:37:11
  • Location: PA
  • Status: offline
Re: Trump 2024 2024/02/20 14:35:47 (permalink)
crappiefisher
 Any of you guys ever go to a Turkey shoot?
 




Yes. They can be fun, some clubs will have divisions, and yes, some dudes spend big money on custom barrels to win a frozen bird. 
Page: << < ..2627282930.. > >> Showing page 29 of 34
Jump to: