Gun Registration Fails...So Sorry...LOL

avoidance and obfuscation. a clear signal that you know you've lost the debate.

You said "the majority of private sellers actually have a moral compass. 98% of the gun owners I know would never willingly sell one of their guns to someone they suspected would use it to commit crimes."

That is your opinion based on the people you know only. It doesn't cover every gun owner in the country.
 
You said "the majority of private sellers actually have a moral compass. 98% of the gun owners I know would never willingly sell one of their guns to someone they suspected would use it to commit crimes."

That is your opinion based on the people you know only. It doesn't cover every gun owner in the country.
most of the libs here (including you) like to equate polls of 1,000 people as being representative of all of America. Do you not think that I know 1,000 gun owners? I've been a gun rights/open carry advocate for almost 6 years in this state and have met thousands of gun owners, so my opinion has a basis in relative fact.
 
most of the libs here (including you) like to equate polls of 1,000 people as being representative of all of America. Do you not think that I know 1,000 gun owners? I've been a gun rights/open carry advocate for almost 6 years in this state and have met thousands of gun owners, so my opinion has a basis in relative fact.
The Libs take their polls in antigun cities/States like New York City, and then they try to browbeat US into believing their manipulated polls.
 
most of the libs here (including you) like to equate polls of 1,000 people as being representative of all of America. Do you not think that I know 1,000 gun owners? I've been a gun rights/open carry advocate for almost 6 years in this state and have met thousands of gun owners, so my opinion has a basis in relative fact.

i do not support your non-scientific outlook here. the science of sample sizes is well documented. A random sampling of 300 people can pretty much give you a 95% confidence interval for the nation.

What I will give you though is that christie never believes in the science of polling until it apparently backs up her claims, and otherwise she'll outright dismiss other polls on other topics like the hypocrite she is.

But it's what I have said earlier in this thread.... if so many people support these measures, damn the senators are in hot water today! The massive 90% should all get together and do an amendment rewrite. But none of that is going to happen, is it? THere is a difference between passively saying yes to something and being passionate and really caring about an issue. Most people that like gun grabber laws might think it's a good idea, but they don't really give a shit one way or the other. If they did give a shit, the gun grabbers would be able to get shit done on this issue, but they CAN'T.
 
And let's not forget the massive companies that have left fascist states for greener pastures. PTR, Colt, Beretta, Magpul....the list goes on. Several thousand jobs have left the taker states.
 
And let's not forget the massive companies that have left fascist states for greener pastures. PTR, Colt, Beretta, Magpul....the list goes on. Several thousand jobs have left the taker states.

that's not an argument for gun grabbers. they probably love that evil gun makers have lost jobs in their state.
 
most of the libs here (including you) like to equate polls of 1,000 people as being representative of all of America. Do you not think that I know 1,000 gun owners? I've been a gun rights/open carry advocate for almost 6 years in this state and have met thousands of gun owners, so my opinion has a basis in relative fact.

How quickly you guys forget. How many polls gave the election to Rmoney? How many said it was too close to predict?

When Nate Silver called it correctly, righties were stunned. So say what you want, I take any poll on any subject with a grain of salt, because of all the intangibles connected with them.
 
"Taker states, fascist states..." Stop, your emotional verbiage is embarrassing for you.

You seem to confuse what is emotion and what is fact. Those descriptors are accurate measurable and quantifiable, therefore they cannot be emotional except to those who do not wish to attribute such descriptions, because they have an emotional investment in the matter.
 
You seem to confuse what is emotion and what is fact. Those descriptors are accurate measurable and quantifiable, therefore they cannot be emotional except to those who do not wish to attribute such descriptions, because they have an emotional investment in the matter.

Industrial state = fact.
Agricultural state = fact.
Mountain state = fact.
Plains state = fact.

Taker state ≠ fact.
 
If they are innocent, yes, but by this time they probably hate the US for their imprisonment, and may indeed become terrorists. It is a lose, lose situation.

They would not be the first nor the last. Regardless of what they may do, it is our moral obligation to free those who are unjustly held.
 
You've already given "a" specific instance. You just haven't shown that "a" specific instance automatically translates to all background checks will lead to registration.
yet with the constant abuse of 'laws' that the government has been caught in, why should we take it at face value that THIS is the one they will suddenly obey?
 
Back
Top