Strict gun control in france.

[The Grand Nudger]

What does that even mean?

I'm not an english tutor. 

Strawman.

Who has been excusing your politicians for being ineffective? Did I say that?

I didn't say that you did, I said that we need you for it.   So...no, not a strawman.....l2logic.

And you are deluded if you think gun ownership will stop the removal of your civil liberties.

That...would be a strawman.  You're welcome.  

I noticed for example that you did not counter my argument in my previous post that they haven't yet stopped the NSA from spying on you or the removal of your rights. So at what point is gun ownership going to be useful in stopping a fascist government from rising up. It's called the thin end of a wedge for a reason you know.

You think that's an argument....and why would it matter if it were?  

And are you even contemplating that there could be something more important than gun ownership in achieving this? Like for example education.

That'd be great, we need more of that, are you under the impression that we disagree?  Why would you be under that impression? Couldn't have anything to do with you being an unintentional shill...now could it?

What would you prefer? An uneducated gun toting population that believes everything its leaders tell it? Or an educated population with strict gun controls? This is not a false dichotomy because if you choose the latter than you admit that education is more important than gun ownership. If your population is educated and politically aware then you don't need guns because politicians can't get away with their lies and selling you out.

I'd prefer the latter.....and your comments in this demonstrate the truth of precisely what I posted to you.  

Because by the mere fact of owning a gun you are creating yet one more opportunity for it to be stolen and for it to fall into the hands of a criminal. No matter how careful you are, your house can still be broken into.

That's not actually how criminals get guns.  See, you've been had.   Again, sorry.  A theif can come into my house and steal every gun here, and it won't do him a lick of good (unless he was looking for a club, and a baseball bat is much better at that). He won't even know why they don't work - just like you don;t understand that a gun can be made discreetly inoperative, clearly.

Also if law abiding citizens own guns then criminals need to carry them. If law abiding citizens did not routinely own guns then criminals would not need to use them. You're probably thinking that they would anyway but they carry a cost. If the criminal gets caught with it then they are more likely to be sent to jail for a long time. If the criminal needs to use one then it's more likely to result in murder which again increases the chances of being caught and sent to jail.

I'm not sure how to respond to this......you think criminals need guns, because law abiding citizens have guns, and this is somehow an argument for gun control?  I would have gone the route of "because the police executioners have them", if I was going that route to begin with....but I wouldn't...because that route is nuts, fundamentally (and I don;t think that cops need them either). No one needs a gun, for anything - laying aside soldiers and other irrelevance.

You, are, a, shill. This was a shill's response, completely in line with my last post. Again, I'm sorry, and it's not your fault...we're assholes (and apparently, we're pretty good at it). No one likes to think that they've been had. You have been. I'm not who you think I am, but I am very much pro-gun......and perhaps you ought to ask yourself who told you that I was whoever you have in mind?

Do something about it.