(May 7, 2017 at 8:34 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(May 7, 2017 at 7:48 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: That means some people have way to many. 

I don't have too many. I'm still collecting.

Quote:As for your guns, nobody's died by them yet. You can't guarantee they won't.

You can't guarantee that nobody will die from you being behind the wheel of a car. Will you stop driving?

Quote:You take them out of the safe you can't guarantee you'll still have them tomorrow.

You can't guarantee that your guns won't be stolen.

Quote:If you say you don't care I'll save that for the record. I have a whole lot of similar pronouncements. Makes for convincing evidence.

You keep records of forum posts? You must be bored.

Nope, they're for a Psych class. 

The rest of your responses were silly.

(May 7, 2017 at 8:12 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(May 7, 2017 at 7:54 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Most "gun households" are multigun households.  I'm representative, I have a few.  They all do ever so slightly different things.  My guns, also, have never killed anyone..and there's no reason to suspect that my (or Kusa's) guns ever will, since the crushing majority of guns never do kill anyone even when the owner is a complete and utter dunce.

The stats tell us that even though Kusa imagines some home defender scenario..he will either a: not act as he thinks he will, b-not have access to his firearm, or c, not reach for his firearm even though he has access.  The implied "what if" scenario that exists to serve an imaginary threat is, itself, imaginary.

I wish people would fucking stop making it about "me" and look at the larger long term picture. 

The majority of guns don't have to kill anyone because guns are OBJECTS. But if there is a flooded market and that creates more opportunity for just enough guns to be used by people in mass to cause problems.

Just like the stupid argument Muslims make "not all Muslims", which is a correct statement because MOST MUSLIMS are not terrorists, but in the east, their is a theocratic mindset that is just big enough to cause problems.

If anyone is playing into the bullshit of an "imaginary threat" it would be right wing blind worship of firearms. Nobody on the left I would consider sane wants to ban every single firearm. Just like no liberal Muslim should say that Trump's bullshit ban on Muslims is correct. That still would not negate the collective mindset of those who are the minority causing problems for their own majority.

Yes, right wing nutjobs play to an imaginary threat in order to send a readily exploitable demographic to the polls over this seemingly crucial single-issue voter market.   Whose been working you up, though?  It doesn't sound...to me, like you're reading from the rightwing script, and yet.....you're worked up over an imaginary threat yourself.  So much so that you are, here, attempting to make an analogy between gun ownership and terrorism.  

In any case, whose minority demographic are we talking about?  Hot pistols and gun trafficking have about as much to do with gun owners as they do with you, and even less to do with you or gun owners than islamic terrorism has to do with islam.  

Quote:It is all in your head if you think banning big clips or spray riffles will be the end to all firearms. It is all in your head if you stupidly assume no liberals own firearms. 

Again, you need food, you want caviar. You need a car, you want a Lamborghini.

................?

Quote:You have a right to be a Muslim, you don't have the right to assault people who criticize Islam.

You have a right to firearms, you dont have a right to a free for all with no regulations.

Where is this gun free for all, with no regulations, occurring?  Who, do you think...thinks there should -be- a free for all with no regulations?  I'm just trying to figure out who or what the target of your criticism is.  

Quote:In western society you you either value voting or you dont. If you value voting that means long term, sometimes you dont get everything you want. If you cannot accept compromise then don't claim you value western pluralism.

.......................?

(May 8, 2017 at 6:58 am)Khemikal Wrote:

(May 7, 2017 at 8:12 pm)Brian37 Wrote: I wish people would fucking stop making it about "me" and look at the larger long term picture. 

The majority of guns don't have to kill anyone because guns are OBJECTS. But if there is a flooded market and that creates more opportunity for just enough guns to be used by people in mass to cause problems.

Just like the stupid argument Muslims make "not all Muslims", which is a correct statement because MOST MUSLIMS are not terrorists, but in the east, their is a theocratic mindset that is just big enough to cause problems.

If anyone is playing into the bullshit of an "imaginary threat" it would be right wing blind worship of firearms. Nobody on the left I would consider sane wants to ban every single firearm. Just like no liberal Muslim should say that Trump's bullshit ban on Muslims is correct. That still would not negate the collective mindset of those who are the minority causing problems for their own majority.

Yes, right wing nutjobs play to an imaginary threat in order to send a readily exploitable demographic to the polls over this seemingly crucial single-issue voter market.   Whose been working you up, though?  It doesn't sound...to me, like you're reading from the rightwing script, and yet.....you're worked up over an imaginary threat yourself.  So much so that you are, here, attempting to make an analogy between gun ownership and terrorism.  

In any case, whose minority demographic are we talking about?  Hot pistols and gun trafficking have about as much to do with gun owners as they do with you, and even less to do with you or gun owners than islamic terrorism has to do with islam.  

Quote:It is all in your head if you think banning big clips or spray riffles will be the end to all firearms. It is all in your head if you stupidly assume no liberals own firearms. 

Again, you need food, you want caviar. You need a car, you want a Lamborghini.

................?

Quote:You have a right to be a Muslim, you don't have the right to assault people who criticize Islam.

You have a right to firearms, you dont have a right to a free for all with no regulations.

Where is this gun free for all, with no regulations, occurring?  Who, do you think...thinks there should -be- a free for all with no regulations?  I'm just trying to figure out who or what the target of your criticism is.  

Quote:In western society you you either value voting or you dont. If you value voting that means long term, sometimes you dont get everything you want. If you cannot accept compromise then don't claim you value western pluralism.

.......................?

I am not imagining shit. We have had a gun injury/death epidemic for decades. The last time the GOP gave a shit about that was when Reagan and Brady got shot. I am tired of fucking giving one shit about coddling the insecurities of idiots who flip out over a non existent threat in order to protect our flooded market.

The real threat is the marketing of the NRA. Just like big tobacco marketed cigarettes.

Yes it is a free for all because the GOP obstructs any laws that could reduce gun injuries and death. Our regulations are not universal, there is no universal background check, which a majority of Americans  and even the majority of gun owners want. 

I see stories every fucking day out here in the sticks where I live. Shootings are not an urban thing only. 

The real threat is that another corporate lobby just like big oil, is bullying government to put profits over lives. Just like big pharma has created an opiod epidemic. Guns are simply another product with CEOs who care more about profits than public safety.

Brian, Why do you want to ban all guns?

(May 8, 2017 at 7:49 am)KUSA Wrote: Brian, Why do you want to ban all guns?

Best you got?

(May 8, 2017 at 7:49 am)KUSA Wrote: Brian, Why do you want to ban all guns?

Do not PM me again. You know how to use your ignore option. Now you have no right to bitch after asking me not to respond to you and yet here you are responding to me. You are not going to get away with falsely playing victim. And you are also not going to get away with repeatedly lying about my position on firearms.

Now if you really want me to hate you personally, keep pulling shit like this and I will.

Not going to play games with you.

All you do is play games with me. You keep insisting that I have a different position about things and you persist on with your straw man arguments. I just wanted you to see how it felt.

(May 8, 2017 at 8:02 am)KUSA Wrote: All you do is play games with me. You keep insisting that I have a different position about things and you persist on with your straw man arguments. I just wanted you to see how it felt.

No, you behave like a brat in the same manor as a right wing Christian when you tell them there is no such thing as a magic baby born without a second set of DNA.

You put value over an object, you have been brainwashed into thinking every use of a firearm will have a happy ending. And you also ignore a fellow firearm owner on top of that. 

So you are not just pissing me off. Now you need to grow up and stop falsely playing victim.

(May 8, 2017 at 8:02 am)KUSA Wrote: All you do is play games with me. You keep insisting that I have a different position about things and you persist on with your straw man arguments. I just wanted you to see how it felt.

And lying is good if both sides do it? You are willing to lower yourself if nobody wants to come up to your level? How sad.

(May 8, 2017 at 8:17 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(May 8, 2017 at 8:02 am)KUSA Wrote: All you do is play games with me. You keep insisting that I have a different position about things and you persist on with your straw man arguments. I just wanted you to see how it felt.

And lying is good if both sides do it? You are willing to lower yourself if nobody wants to come up to your level? How sad.

I have never lied about his position. At best misunderstood, but not even then. The worst part is that he wont even listen to you after you state your own history of owning firearms.

I have not misunderstood him on bit. I see the same behaviors of blind loyalty to his position as I do when people defend a holy book. You and I both have rightfully expressed concern about his dreamy eyed talk of "If then I'd" as  if firearm use was an arcade game. 

Not once have you, being a firearm owner, talked like him, or bragged like him. Maybe you can talk some sense into him.