Go to hell whitlock.

[A Salt Weapon]

Yes I am a noob here, but after hearing that whitlock just blamed Belcher and his girlfriends death on lack of more restrictive gun laws.
You are a true classless piece of shit, using this incident to push your anti-bill of rights agenda, **** you.
Posted via Mobile Device

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by -King-

So countries are refusing to invade us because Johnny Doe around the way has a gun?

You seem to have forgotten that behind every blade of grass is a rifleman, that was from the japanese (general, king, emperor, whatever) when asked why he bombed pearl harbor instead of invading the mainland.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Fat Elvis]

Grrrrrr....

[Reerun_KC]

Originally Posted by PostRockPablo

I'm going to go buy a handgun to keep Canada out.

**** those guys.

We have been looking at the sig tactical handguns lately. We just purchased some sub compacts for our pockets. But the sigs are pretty sweet.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

Whitlock was right on the mark as usual. Hilarious that his words got sent out like that by Costas to a demographic that will completely hate them.

Whitlock was correct in many of the facts and assumptions he posits as fact. I still disagree with his political and policy conclusions and suggestions.

Just to be clear: I will grant that a handgun ban will probably result in decreased gun violence AND decreased overall violence and deaths. They wont all grab a knife instead, I do agree that having a handgun may make it more likely for some people to shoot in a flash of rage. Banning guns probably will result in fewer deaths overall.

Despite all that, I disagree with increased gun control or any form of handgun ban.

Handgun ownership and legalization comes with a price that must occasionally be paid in blood. No matter what, crazy people and hotheads will always have a gun if its widely available. And trying to dismiss that with "oh, they'd just stab instead" is not really intellectually honest in my mind.

We should stop fooling ourselves, accept the fact that the freedoms we have re: gun ownership means more violence, and state clearly that though we can try to minimize the violence without infringing on our freedoms, we are OK with paying that price because giving up handgun ownership is unacceptable.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

Big reason why the Empire of Japan did not try to invade the west coast in 41

Yea US gun ownership is probably not as relevant now a days in preventing an invasion but it damn sure has been in the past. Anyone who doesn't get that probably fails to understand how Europe fell so easy in WWII.

[kcxiv]

Originally Posted by FAX

If I've said it once, I've said it ... oh ... 12 times, maybe.

Guns don't kill people, holes do.

FAX

hehe, i dont care one way or another for guns or against, but this part i know, guns make it alot easier to pull a trigger when your in a moment of rage. I have seen people do it. Its true though, guns dont kill, stupid people with guns kill. Like it or not, Guns give people big balls to think they are tough! I have seen it on this forums plenty.

Anyways, like i said, not for or against it, but i understand what he's saying.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by ILChief

Link?

You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." is a quote by Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II

Go find your own link

[ILChief]

[notorious]

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

We have been looking at the sig tactical handguns lately. We just purchased some sub compacts for our pockets. But the sigs are pretty sweet.

S&W 642.

My wife has an LC9, and I would take my S&W without a second thought.

That is if I can't get to my shotgun.

[kcxiv]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Whitlock was correct in many of the facts and assumptions he posits as fact. I still disagree with his political and policy conclusions and suggestions.

Just to be clear: I will grant that a handgun ban will probably result in decreased gun violence AND decreased overall violence and deaths. They wont all grab a knife instead, I do agree that having a handgun may make it more likely for some people to shoot in a flash of rage. Banning guns probably will result in fewer deaths overall.

Despite all that, I disagree with increased gun control or any form of handgun ban.

Handgun ownership and legalization comes with a price that must occasionally be paid in blood. No matter what, crazy people and hotheads will always have a gun if its widely available. And trying to dismiss that with "oh, they'd just stab instead" is not really intellectually honest in my mind.

We should stop fooling ourselves, accept the fact that the freedoms we have re: gun ownership means more violence, and state clearly that though we can try to minimize the violence without infringing on our freedoms, we are OK with paying that price because giving up handgun ownership is unacceptable.

Totally agree and anyone that doesnt is just a blind.

[Predarat]

If they would have banned guns along time ago OJ would never have used his gun to stab Nicole.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." is a quote by Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II

Go find your own link

• You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
  
  • It has been declared this attribution is "unsubstantiated and almost certainly bogus, even though it has been repeated thousands of times in various Internet postings. There is no record of the commander in chief of Japan’s wartime fleet ever saying it.", according to Brooks Jackson in "Misquoting Yamamoto" at Factcheck.org (11 May 2009)

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Fruit Ninja

hehe, i dont care one way or another for guns or against, but this part i know, guns make it alot easier to pull a trigger when your in a moment of rage. I have seen people do it. Its true though, guns dont kill, stupid people with guns kill. Like it or not, Guns give people big balls to think they are tough! I have seen it on this forums plenty.

Anyways, like i said, not for or against it, but i understand what he's saying.

I assume you mean internet keyboards allow tough talk. Yea some of this shit people say here would NEVER be said face to face.

You could get shot.

[Romeo's Pants]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

just blamed Belcher and his girlfriends death on lack of more restrictive gun laws.
Posted via Mobile Device

Clearly the gun was to blame.

Because there's no way a 6'1", 240+ lb linebacker could kill his girlfriend without a gun.

[Belial]

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis

This is your first post and I'm already tired of listening to you....

then tune out fatty