Reality check for Gunners

USFREEDOM911 said:
Sorry; but I'm not going to try to ride this dead horse anymore.

You have taken 1 single incident and have tried to tie it into the entire situation.

Until you can show me where gun show promoters have been prosecuted for a crime that was committed for a gun that was legally sold at the said gun show, you're just wishing upon a star.
Click to expand...

Actually, the original point of contention was whether gun shows were liable for crimes committed by sellers who broke the rules, or by not providing adequate security against theft of weapons or the safety of participants and customers. The links I provide definitely show that they are....as anyone who read them will tell you.


What you NOW say is a totally different discussion. I'm willing to go that route IF you acknowledge that I met the burden of proof by providing the court cases that backed up the original points of discussion. Difficulty/error with a second link is no excuse for you...as I readily supplies an alternative. YOU have to prove the information I provided is NOT correct. If you can't, then I was right in my original contention. If you cannot acknowledge that, then there is no point in further discussion.

Remember, the chronology of the posts on this thread prove me correct. Denial of this is just an exercise in futility.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually, the original point of contention was whether gun shows were liable for crimes committed by sellers who broke the rules, or by not providing adequate security against theft of weapons or the safety of participants and customers. The links I provide definitely show that they are....as anyone who read them will tell you.


What you NOW say is a totally different discussion. I'm willing to go that route IF you acknowledge that I met the burden of proof by providing the court cases that backed up the original points of discussion. Difficulty/error with a second link is no excuse for you...as I readily supplies an alternative. YOU have to prove the information I provided is NOT correct. If you can't, then I was right in my original contention. If you cannot acknowledge that, then there is no point in further discussion.

Remember, the chronology of the posts on this thread prove me correct. Denial of this is just an exercise in futility.
Click to expand...


And once again, you try to use a single incident and then "broad paint brush" it all.

Are you going to acknowledge that all you have is a single incident??
It's really sad that you've closed your reasoning, to only that which makes you feel comfortable.
You really should try to put an end to your own futility; ie: denial. :good4u:
 
Lowaicue said:
Perhaps it would be useful to define what we mean by rights.
I mean those inalienable freedoms than man has because he is man. You appear to mean rights that your forbears have wrested from those intent on denying those freedoms. I would maintain that rights of that type must, by their very nature, be transient, since they were won in a world far different from the one which we now inhabit.
We might ask what rights are natural to a lion or an Orang Utan. In fact they have the rights to an unhindered existence for as long as we, who control more, choose to allow those rights. We are destroying those rights by destroying their habitat... but then, those are our 'rights' ....aren't they.
The whole subject of rights is a bit of a nonsense and I hate to say this but to dwell on such falsities allows the strong, who govern us, to exercise ever more control over us. (History shows that that is not always a bad thing since many people would rather take than give instructions.)
Its those 'trigger' words again. Those words that have been hard wired into us by the real owners of our lives. Freedom. Rights. Democracy. Peace. Its the planned polarisation of views, the nurturing of the concept of us and them, whoever 'us' happens to be at the time.
You do, however, have the right to ignore what I say.
Click to expand...

huH????? (scratches head):eek:
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Actually, the original point of contention was whether gun shows were liable for crimes committed by sellers who broke the rules, or by not providing adequate security against theft of weapons or the safety of participants and customers. The links I provide definitely show that they are....as anyone who read them will tell you.


What you NOW say is a totally different discussion. I'm willing to go that route IF you acknowledge that I met the burden of proof by providing the court cases that backed up the original points of discussion. Difficulty/error with a second link is no excuse for you...as I readily supplies an alternative. YOU have to prove the information I provided is NOT correct. If you can't, then I was right in my original contention. If you cannot acknowledge that, then there is no point in further discussion.

Remember, the chronology of the posts on this thread prove me correct. Denial of this is just an exercise in futility.
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
And once again, you try to use a single incident and then "broad paint brush" it all.

That is a lie....as the chronology of the posts show, YOU are the one who suddenly declared that because one link I provided didn't pan out properly, the discussion was suddenly dead. Interesting, because you never acknowledged the information of the other link, let alone the court case title of it (which could be easily googled). Why you purposely lie when the proof to the contrary is there for all to see has always mystified me.

Are you going to acknowledge that all you have is a single incident??

I have given you two links to two different court cases that prove my assertions that gun shows can be held liable for crimes either by unscrupulous dealers or by theft due to lax security. You refuse to acknowledge this simple fact, which would mean your having to admit that you were wrong in your original challenge to my statement. The posts back me up on this.....now you try to ignore this and create some false premise that I never asserted or alluded to. In effect, you're just lying to avoid admitting that you were wrong.

It's really sad that you've closed your reasoning, to only that which makes you feel comfortable.
You really should try to put an end to your own futility; ie: denial. :good4u:
Click to expand...

Well, I tried to have a rational debate with you. But it's painfully obvious that your ego cannot handle conceding a fact based point to me. Instead, you delude yourself and attempt to delude others by creating some false premise that the posts won't support, and then add on some absurd personal attack to that. As I said, the chronology of the post prove me out on this....and prove you to be nothing more than a petulant child who lies at the drop of a hat. Oh well, back into the dust bin with you.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Well, I tried to have a rational debate with you. But it's painfully obvious that your ego cannot handle conceding a fact based point to me. Instead, you delude yourself and attempt to delude others by creating some false premise that the posts won't support, and then add on some absurd personal attack to that. As I said, the chronology of the post prove me out on this....and prove you to be nothing more than a petulant child who lies at the drop of a hat. Oh well, back into the dust bin with you.
Click to expand...

All you've done, is attempt to do exactly as I said you were trying to do.
Then you puff out your puny chest and attempt to claim a faux victory.

RUN COWARD, RUN :good4u:

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
 
Lowaicue said:
Well, that'll make you happy then, won't it?
Click to expand...


That's another dummy that I've put on IA.....I kicked his ass so bad on the old AOL boards that he NEVER directly debates me here. He just throws rocks from behind the skirts of the other neocon numbskulls....he's such an intellectual coward.

You and I may have disagreements and dust-ups, but at least YOU can carry on a rational discussion. As you can see, Freedumb is incapable of such...especially when he realizes he can't be proved right.
 
Taichiliberal said:
That's another dummy that I've put on IA.....I kicked his ass so bad on the old AOL boards that he NEVER directly debates me here. He just throws rocks from behind the skirts of the other neocon numbskulls....he's such an intellectual coward.

You and I may have disagreements and dust-ups, but at least YOU can carry on a rational discussion. As you can see, Freedumb is incapable of such...especially when he realizes he can't be proved right.
Click to expand...

AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, look.
Sissie is "throwing rocks" from behind NoIQ's Chairman Mao outfit. :good4u:
 
Lowaicue said:
So are most of the people who get killed by guns.
Click to expand...

Not true. Murder victims often have extensive criminal histories and in some of our cities the percentage is simply appalling.
Criminals target each other, trend shows

"WASHINGTON — A spike in murders in many cities is claiming a startling number of victims with criminal records, police say, suggesting that drug and gang wars are behind the escalating violence.

Police increasingly explore criminal pasts of homicide victims as well as suspects as they search for sources of the violence, which has risen the past two years after a decade of decline, according to the FBI's annual measures of U.S. crime.

Understanding victims' pasts is critical to driving crime back down, police and crime analysts say. "If you are trying to look at prevention, you need to look at the lives of the people involved," says Mallory O'Brien, director of the Homicide Review Commission in Milwaukee.
​
Percentages of murder victims with criminal histories:

Baltimore 91%
Newark 85%
Milwaukee 77%
Philadelphia 75%
 
the way this country is moving towards socialism why in the world would anyone be on the side of gun control? You all realize that a revolution will come here at some point right?
 
Chapdog said:
the way this country is moving towards socialism why in the world would anyone be on the side of gun control? You all realize that a revolution will come here at some point right?
Click to expand...

I started this thread by pointing out a fact.....that criminals can go to gun shows and get guns....something that was deemed highly unlikely or rare by gunners.

Rather than just deal with that reality, gunners are all over the place. And despite being proven wrong on some accounts, they just stubbornly throw the kitchen sink in hopes no one will notice.

Which is why I find it fascinating that you re-animate the old NRA boogey man of the world socialist conspiracy to take away your gun (with Obama the latest national incarnation). Last time I check, the administration that did the most damage to your civil rights under the Constitution and Bill of Rights just spent 8 years doing so with the support of the NRA. Go figure.
 
meme said:
Oh no, poor Freedom, it's back to the dustbin for you from the Tichia pet...:cof1:
Click to expand...

Yep...so now that you've got that off your chest....can you disprove anything I posted? Or can you at least offer an honest, logical discussion as to why you disagree with me?
 
Chapdog said:
the way this country is moving towards socialism why in the world would anyone be on the side of gun control? You all realize that a revolution will come here at some point right?
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah, yeah.
More guns, more deaths, less socialism.
Kill the commies.....



who are the commies? er..... er ..... well, we know who they are dont we?

Kill 'em. Shoot the bastards. Invade their countries.

Send Obama back to Kenya. get more guns.

Kill 'em all.

This America and we are not gonna put up with all this socialism. Right? Yeah, right. Kill 'em.

Twat.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I started this thread by pointing out a fact.....that criminals can go to gun shows and get guns....something that was deemed highly unlikely or rare by gunners.

Rather than just deal with that reality, gunners are all over the place. And despite being proven wrong on some accounts, they just stubbornly throw the kitchen sink in hopes no one will notice.
Click to expand...
and what some of us did is show you the DoJ/FBI study that tells you specifically that less than 1% of crime guns get traced back to private sellers at gun shows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top