Oh those funny gun lovers . . .

[CBWx2]

Since this is obviously truthful, because both you and CBW posted it - how many guns that have been sold have been used to kill someone?  And how many guns that have been sold have not been used to kill someone?

It doesn't really matter.

Of course not.  Why would a silly thing like "facts" matter in a discussion where emotional rants and inferior opinions run rampant?

So any fact matters, regardless of how irrelevant it is? Here's one, the English invented football (soccer) in 1060 AD when kicking around the heads of slaughtered Danish invaders. Have I proven my point about gun control? Facts matter, right?

[olafberserker]

Since this is obviously truthful, because both you and CBW posted it - how many guns that have been sold have been used to kill someone?  And how many guns that have been sold have not been used to kill someone?

It doesn't really matter.

Of course not.  Why would a silly thing like "facts" matter in a discussion where emotional rants and inferior opinions run rampant?

So any fact matters, regardless of how irrelevant it is? Here's one, the English invented football (soccer) in 1060 AD when kicking around the heads of slaughtered Danish invaders. Have I proven my point about gun control? Facts matter, right?

quoted

[VinBucFan]

why do you still pretend to support the 2nd amendment ? It's a simple question , but one you can't justify in a rational way while holding your current position.

Your comments make so little sense that they are difficult to follow.  I believe exactly what the Supreme Court has said about the 2nd Amendment and that is that citizens in this country have a limited right to bear arms. If anything, it sounds like you might be a bit out of step.

[VinBucFan]

Of course not.  Why would a silly thing like "facts" matter in a discussion where emotional rants and inferior opinions run rampant?

Even though all bets are off with Buggsy, it is freakin amazing to see one of the pro-gun crowd type something like "why would a silly thing like 'facts' matter" in one of these gun threads. Ridiculous, especially because he is not even posting a fact he is asking a question . . .  .lol

  I have posted fact, after fact after fact . .  all that should lead a reasonable person to conclude that we've gone too far with guns in this country and I am not sure I have seen a SINGLE fact posted to support the notion that there are NOT too many guns. Lots of personal attacks and other BS, but no facts to support the claim that there are NOT too many guns in this country.

[Dolorous Jason]

My last post was not difficult to understand at all. You simply couldn't answer the question. Just as I thought. Let us know when you are ready to tell us WHY you support the supreme courts decision . Why do we need a limited right to bear arms ?

[Biggs3535]

Maybe it's time for a new hobby?

Good call, and your best post on the board.  Here's a suggestion: You and Morgana can start a Bridge Club.  You would be able to provide more value to that group than you do to this group.  The board would miss laughing at your caricature arse, but you and Morgana could build a friendship that would last a lifetime.

[Biggs3535]

Since this is obviously truthful, because both you and CBW posted it - how many guns that have been sold have been used to kill someone?  And how many guns that have been sold have not been used to kill someone?

It doesn't really matter.

Of course not.  Why would a silly thing like "facts" matter in a discussion where emotional rants and inferior opinions run rampant?

So any fact matters, regardless of how irrelevant it is? Here's one, the English invented football (soccer) in 1060 AD when kicking around the heads of slaughtered Danish invaders. Have I proven my point about gun control? Facts matter, right?

Geebus H., you can't be serious with this nonsense.

[VinBucFan]

My last post was not difficult to understand at all. You simply couldn't answer the question. Just as I thought. Let us know when you are ready to tell us WHY you support the supreme courts decision . Why do we need a limited right to bear arms ?

But first you said I couldnt even hold my position and support the 2nd

why do you still pretend to support the 2nd amendment ? It's a simple question , but one you can't justify in a rational way while holding your current position.

Now you want me to explain to you why I agree with Heller? Like I said, you make no sense

[VinBucFan]

Maybe it's time for a new hobby?

Good call, and your best post on the board.  Here's a suggestion: You and Morgana can start a Bridge Club.  You would be able to provide more value to that group than you do to this group.  The board would miss laughing at your caricature arse, but you and Morgana could build a friendship that would last a lifetime.

so posts the guy who complained about a lack of facts and emotional responses . . . .lmao. . .  . you never let me down Buggsy

[VinBucFan]

For anyone in the pro-gun crowd:  what is your best argument to support the claim that there are NOT too many guns in the US?

[Dolorous Jason]

It makes perfect sense vince. I will ask you again. A very simple question : why do you support a limited right to bear arms ?

[VinBucFan]

It makes perfect sense vince. I will ask you again. A very simple question : why do you support a limited right to bear arms ?

because I support the Constitution. Like I said, your question is now different (guessing you realized the first comment made no sense) but it still makes no sense.  Note this though:

For anyone in the pro-gun crowd:  what is your best argument to support the claim that there are NOT too many guns in the US?

[Dolorous Jason]

The constitution allows for amendments so that we can alter anything we deem to not be working. " I support the constitution " is not a valid answer. I will ask you again : why do you support a limited right to bear arms?  I will answer your question after you stop playing dumb and answer mine .

[VinBucFan]

The constitution allows for amendments,  so that we can alter anything we deem to not be working. " I support the constitution " is not a valid answer. I will ask you again : why do you support a limited right to bear arms?  I will answer your question after you answer mine.

lol, funny thing about you guys is you get answers you don't like and you declare them invalid. If enough people felt it within their interest to amend the Constitution, so be it. That's the process. I hope it would not be amended to make the 2nd an unlimited right to bear arms, lol, but I get that there is a legitimate interest in self defense, I don't deny that, never have that I can recall. Despite your fantasy claims to the contrary I have never advocated banning all guns, just reducing the number/type, which brings me back to the question i posted, let's see if you can give the first and best reponse:

For anyone in the pro-gun crowd:  what is your best argument to support the claim that there are NOT too many guns in the US?

[VinBucFan]

The constitution allows for amendments,  so that we can alter anything we deem to not be working. " I support the constitution " is not a valid answer. I will ask you again : why do you support a limited right to bear arms?  I will answer your question after you answer mine.

lol, funny thing about you guys is you get answers you don't like and you declare them invalid. If enough people felt it within their interest to amend the Constitution, so be it. That's the process. I hope it would not be amended to make the 2nd an unlimited right to bear arms, lol, but I get that there is a legitimate interest in self defense, I don't deny that, never have that I can recall. Despite your fantasy claims to the contrary I have never advocated banning all guns, just reducing the number/type, which brings me back to the question i posted, let's see if you can give the first and best reponse:

For anyone in the pro-gun crowd:  what is your best argument to support the claim that there are NOT too many guns in the US?

Hmmm... working on a long response?