Moderator: Metal Sludge
Shhhh... Constantard and Faildog69 are busy whacking off to our original posts..Hooligan wrote:To clarify, since you guys are anal perfectionists, I meant to outlaw drinking itself.Luminiferous wrote:Isn't it already outlawed?Hooligan wrote: How do you stop people from drinking and driving unless you outlaw it?
Bone city roller, Cunstantine and fooligan, a trifecta of stupid.Luminiferous wrote:It was also explained to you several months ago Spedtard, that the young man in my avatar is not me, (which others on this board who have met and know me can attest to) but a young dead US soldier I knew who was killed in Afghanistan.. It is a tribute to his memory.Constantine wrote:in wHAT GRADE DID you quit school Luminufuckous? Your attempt at sarcasm fell flat like the greasy hair on your head.
Nice that you're not above continuing to insult a young US serviceman killed protecting the US.. He was more of a man that you could ever hope to be.
Not surprising seeing how much you hate Americans... You're a coward and a disgrace to this message board.
lol He was referring to schoolagain, failtard lol.. Hilarious that you lol and Constantard lol completely missed it.. lol Drinking and driving is outlawed, yet people still do it.jay city roller wrote:lumi got powned. lol
You two lol should start a lol tard tag team lol..
Hollywood's Burning wrote:A Kisstard is someone who, despite being a grown-up (in age), actually gets upset/angry about who is pretending to be a kittycat and who is pretending to be a spaceman.
Pone? like corn pone?jay city roller wrote:lumi is constantly poned. lolLuminiferous wrote:
Yup, guns stopped every one of those events.jay city roller wrote:RATTrules wrote:Repeal the 2nd Amendment and ban all guns except for police and military.
You really want a police state, don't you? How in the hell would you suggest we get criminals to obey the law and turn in their unregistered guns? IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!
The 2nd Amendment is outdated and was written when there was no electricity or running water. There was the threat of British invasion and bands of Indians that may attack. NONE of that applies anymore!
Remember a little thing called 9/11? Timothy Mcveigh? Pearl FUCKING Harbor? I would say the threat of attack against the United States is just as real now as it was at any other time in our country's history.
I think I would like to pone lumi. It sounds kinda hot.jay city roller wrote: lumi is constantly poned. lol
Can I hit it from the back while u do that? lolMotleyMaiden wrote:I think I would like to pone lumi. It sounds kinda hot.jay city roller wrote: lumi is constantly poned. lol
Hollywood's Burning wrote:A Kisstard is someone who, despite being a grown-up (in age), actually gets upset/angry about who is pretending to be a kittycat and who is pretending to be a spaceman.
Did you see that on the news? That's the exact same comparison they made about just like how smoking has become less and less socially acceptable so will gun ownership. Public smoking is banned most everywhere now since people hate it so much.MotleyMaiden wrote:It is like the "war" on tobacco. 30 years ago, everyone smoked, there was no restrictions. I can remember not only buying cigarettes in high school but having a "smoker's patio". My mother has a hysterectomy in the early 80s and has a smoking room in the hospital. Now you have to be 18 to buy cigarettes, they are not allowed on school property and most hospitals not only don't allow it in the building but don't allow it anywhere on the property. Hell, 20 years ago, when I started nursing, even though smoking wasn't allowed IN the hospital, we did it int he staff bathroom anyway. That would never happen now. You can't even do it in your car while it is parked on the premises. Hell, there are some hospitals that are refusing to even hire smokers.
With everything else in this country, when people are injured are killed, we IMMEDIATELY begin to look for ways to prevent it from happening again. We IMMEDIATELY start to pass laws and regulations to prevent it from happening again. The only exception is guns. 20 children get gunned down and the only reaction from the gun loving right is "hey it is my right to own a gun and we can't stop it from happening. Guns are necessary for our way of life and there is nothing we can do so we shouldn't do anything." In the mean time more kids die.
It is kind of ironic that tobacco smoking is becoming outlawed nearly as quickly as states are legalizing marijuana smoking.RATTrules wrote:Did you see that on the news? That's the exact same comparison they made about just like how smoking has become less and less socially acceptable so will gun ownership. Public smoking is banned most everywhere now since people hate it so much.MotleyMaiden wrote:It is like the "war" on tobacco. 30 years ago, everyone smoked, there was no restrictions. I can remember not only buying cigarettes in high school but having a "smoker's patio". My mother has a hysterectomy in the early 80s and has a smoking room in the hospital. Now you have to be 18 to buy cigarettes, they are not allowed on school property and most hospitals not only don't allow it in the building but don't allow it anywhere on the property. Hell, 20 years ago, when I started nursing, even though smoking wasn't allowed IN the hospital, we did it int he staff bathroom anyway. That would never happen now. You can't even do it in your car while it is parked on the premises. Hell, there are some hospitals that are refusing to even hire smokers.
With everything else in this country, when people are injured are killed, we IMMEDIATELY begin to look for ways to prevent it from happening again. We IMMEDIATELY start to pass laws and regulations to prevent it from happening again. The only exception is guns. 20 children get gunned down and the only reaction from the gun loving right is "hey it is my right to own a gun and we can't stop it from happening. Guns are necessary for our way of life and there is nothing we can do so we shouldn't do anything." In the mean time more kids die.
Hollywood's Burning wrote:A Kisstard is someone who, despite being a grown-up (in age), actually gets upset/angry about who is pretending to be a kittycat and who is pretending to be a spaceman.
I will say that there is a similarity to drinking and guns in that both are fine in the hands of most of the population but in the hands of the wrong person, both have the potential for harsh consequences. At this point, only way to stop drunk driving and other things that go down due to alcohol is to ban it just like with guns. (not that it would work with either) People don't want to give up their drink any more than many want to give up their guns.Stoner wrote:Worst analogy ever.
You can't compare guns to alcohol based on DUI deaths because there are two variables at play in a DUI - alcohol AND driving.
The only way that comparison would even be fair is if you compared deaths caused by drinking and driving vs. deaths caused by shooting and driving.
Third variable problems are one of the first things you learn about in correlational research/statistics. Did you not go to school past high school?
An outright gun ban has as much chance of passing as a new ban on alcohol--zero. The focus is better spent on controlling access and utilizing technology in both tracking and control. Educate owners and require proper storage. There are a great many cultural issues in our society contributing to the violence that also needs addressing. These random nuts aside, its not hard to draw a circle in most cities around where the greatest chance for gun violence will occur. Focus on those areas.RATTrules wrote:Gun bans have worked in England and Australia where they have fewer than 100 gun deaths a year compared to our 12,000+! There were 18 mass shootings in Australia before the gun ban and ZERO mass shootings after it!
You guys know fulwell a gun ban would work here if we actually tried it!
With a gun ban, how does England have 100 gun deaths?RATTrules wrote:Gun bans have worked in England and Australia where they have fewer than 100 gun deaths a year compared to our 12,000+! There were 18 mass shootings in Australia before the gun ban and ZERO mass shootings after it!
You guys know fulwell a gun ban would work here if we actually tried it!
LESS than a 100! There was only 39 gun deaths last year compared to our 12,000+! You guys KNOW that if we were all ordered to turn in our guns like they did over there gun deaths would plummet!SeniorGrande wrote:With a gun ban, how does England have 100 gun deaths?RATTrules wrote:Gun bans have worked in England and Australia where they have fewer than 100 gun deaths a year compared to our 12,000+! There were 18 mass shootings in Australia before the gun ban and ZERO mass shootings after it!
You guys know fulwell a gun ban would work here if we actually tried it!
Answer that, and there's one of the solutions to the problem.
Correct. Problem is these dumb motherfuckers aren't thinking about actually saving lives.Sheep_Mafia wrote:I will say that there is a similarity to drinking and guns in that both are fine in the hands of most of the population but in the hands of the wrong person, both have the potential for harsh consequences. At this point, only way to stop drunk driving and other things that go down due to alcohol is to ban it just like with guns. (not that it would work with either) People don't want to give up their drink any more than many want to give up their guns.Stoner wrote:Worst analogy ever.
You can't compare guns to alcohol based on DUI deaths because there are two variables at play in a DUI - alcohol AND driving.
The only way that comparison would even be fair is if you compared deaths caused by drinking and driving vs. deaths caused by shooting and driving.
Third variable problems are one of the first things you learn about in correlational research/statistics. Did you not go to school past high school?
Whole other discussion, but look at all the devastation done to lives due to alcohol being consumed by those who shouldn't be. Or things that happen in a moment in time with those that can typically handle it. Again, same with guns. If we tried to ban alcohol again we'd have the same argument as with guns minus the 2nd amendment one--that alcohol doesn't kill people, people who should be drinking and driving etc do so people who are responsible should be able to continue to drink.
The world would be a far better place without either imo but that's not where we're at.
I'm talking about saving lives. What are you talking about?Stoner wrote:Yeah, we're the dumbfucks for not comparing apples to fruit cocktail.
What is it with Republicans and fruits?Stoner wrote:Yeah, we're the dumbfucks for not comparing apples to fruit cocktail.
Hooligan wrote:I'm talking about saving lives. What are you talking about?Stoner wrote:Yeah, we're the dumbfucks for not comparing apples to fruit cocktail.
Was my rationale the point of the topic? Are you for or against saving lives? Simple question.Stoner wrote:Hooligan wrote:I'm talking about saving lives. What are you talking about?Stoner wrote:Yeah, we're the dumbfucks for not comparing apples to fruit cocktail.
I'm talking about your rationale. Did I really need to point that out to you?
You should move to Kansas and run for office. That would rule.Luminiferous wrote:Good idea Skate! Do you think it'd be a good idea to also make sure all children in school be required to produce proof they have been baptized and saved by their local church?
Should we also just destroy all the dinosaur and caveman bones in the museums? Maybe do it like the Nazi's did and just have massive bone burnings??
Just thought of another one to ban... Tattoos. Mark of the beast ya know..
Your rationale excludes you from making a point appropriate to the topic, genius. The DUI comparison is faulty, and therefore not congruent with "sensible gun laws". Are you seriously this fucking daft?Hooligan wrote:Was my rationale the point of the topic? Are you for or against saving lives? Simple question.
So you are full of shit. Got it.Stoner wrote:Your rationale excludes you from making a point appropriate to the topic, genius. The DUI comparison is faulty, and therefore not congruent with "sensible gun laws". Are you seriously this fucking daft?Hooligan wrote:Was my rationale the point of the topic? Are you for or against saving lives? Simple question.
"Are you for or against saving lives?"
