Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
x close
Still waiting for Peanut Butter to explain which of his handgun shooting links would have been totally prevented if the perpetrator only had one handgun at home to shoot someone with instead of 2. Afterall , his logic makes perfect sense , and reducing the AMOUNT of handguns people have is going to prevent them from shooting the one they still DO have....( he could save himself a lot of trouble , and actually sound coherent , if he just admitted he is scared of guns and wants the 2nd amendment overturned completely ...for our own good , of course )
Quote from: olafberserker on February 09, 2013, 12:35:37 AMThat's not a number vincent. that is a huge range given by someone too scared to give the number of guns they find reasonable. haven't lied once vincent, that has already been shown. man up and give us the number deflection/coward.lol . . . yeah . . . . right. you just posted another LIE in the other threadHere's one of those lies you . . . .um . . . . . didn't type:Quote from: VinBucFan on February 03, 2013, 03:38:37 PMQuote from: olafberserker on February 03, 2013, 02:47:02 PMI haven't really advocated anything in this thread You should be embarrassed to post that comment^^^^ . . . even I could sum up your position, which is that reducing guns would not solve the problem because motivated people would use other means:Quote from: olafberserker on December 16, 2012, 10:46:32 PMCross bows, subway trains, home made bombs. lunatics are going to be lunatics and at some point will find a way to do their damage. Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:48:04 AMQuote from: VinBucFan on December 19, 2012, 03:40:50 AMHere's some simple math. Ms. Lanza had FIVE registered guns an apparently HUNDREDS of bullets. If you were her would you give up FOUR of the five guns? How about if EACH GUN was worth the life of FIVE six year olds? You could still keep one n guto defend your property, but would you give up four guns to save TWENY six year olds lives? If not, would you give up ONE "assault rifle" to save TWENTY six year olds lives? How much value do you place on your guns?Seems like a simple question to me, but I can imagine the responses from some of you.sounds like hindsight ..............Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:51:32 AMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster^^ Posted as an argument that if it wasn’t guns it would be bombs, as shown by this follow up:Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 11:14:52 AMQuote from: CBWx2 on December 19, 2012, 09:09:44 AMQuote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:51:32 AMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disasterNice job. Had to go all the way back to 1927 for that one. You didn't happen to Google that, did you olaf?that's one. obviously no automatic weapons really helped those young people. there are more. had to google the link, can't post it otherwise..... nice try though Embarrassing.
That's not a number vincent. that is a huge range given by someone too scared to give the number of guns they find reasonable. haven't lied once vincent, that has already been shown. man up and give us the number deflection/coward.
Quote from: olafberserker on February 03, 2013, 02:47:02 PMI haven't really advocated anything in this thread You should be embarrassed to post that comment^^^^ . . . even I could sum up your position, which is that reducing guns would not solve the problem because motivated people would use other means:Quote from: olafberserker on December 16, 2012, 10:46:32 PMCross bows, subway trains, home made bombs. lunatics are going to be lunatics and at some point will find a way to do their damage. Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:48:04 AMQuote from: VinBucFan on December 19, 2012, 03:40:50 AMHere's some simple math. Ms. Lanza had FIVE registered guns an apparently HUNDREDS of bullets. If you were her would you give up FOUR of the five guns? How about if EACH GUN was worth the life of FIVE six year olds? You could still keep one n guto defend your property, but would you give up four guns to save TWENY six year olds lives? If not, would you give up ONE "assault rifle" to save TWENTY six year olds lives? How much value do you place on your guns?Seems like a simple question to me, but I can imagine the responses from some of you.sounds like hindsight ..............Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:51:32 AMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster^^ Posted as an argument that if it wasn’t guns it would be bombs, as shown by this follow up:Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 11:14:52 AMQuote from: CBWx2 on December 19, 2012, 09:09:44 AMQuote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:51:32 AMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disasterNice job. Had to go all the way back to 1927 for that one. You didn't happen to Google that, did you olaf?that's one. obviously no automatic weapons really helped those young people. there are more. had to google the link, can't post it otherwise..... nice try though Embarrassing.
I haven't really advocated anything in this thread
Cross bows, subway trains, home made bombs. lunatics are going to be lunatics and at some point will find a way to do their damage.
Quote from: VinBucFan on December 19, 2012, 03:40:50 AMHere's some simple math. Ms. Lanza had FIVE registered guns an apparently HUNDREDS of bullets. If you were her would you give up FOUR of the five guns? How about if EACH GUN was worth the life of FIVE six year olds? You could still keep one n guto defend your property, but would you give up four guns to save TWENY six year olds lives? If not, would you give up ONE "assault rifle" to save TWENTY six year olds lives? How much value do you place on your guns?Seems like a simple question to me, but I can imagine the responses from some of you.sounds like hindsight ..............
Here's some simple math. Ms. Lanza had FIVE registered guns an apparently HUNDREDS of bullets. If you were her would you give up FOUR of the five guns? How about if EACH GUN was worth the life of FIVE six year olds? You could still keep one n guto defend your property, but would you give up four guns to save TWENY six year olds lives? If not, would you give up ONE "assault rifle" to save TWENTY six year olds lives? How much value do you place on your guns?Seems like a simple question to me, but I can imagine the responses from some of you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
Quote from: CBWx2 on December 19, 2012, 09:09:44 AMQuote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:51:32 AMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disasterNice job. Had to go all the way back to 1927 for that one. You didn't happen to Google that, did you olaf?that's one. obviously no automatic weapons really helped those young people. there are more. had to google the link, can't post it otherwise..... nice try though
Quote from: olafberserker on December 19, 2012, 07:51:32 AMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disasterNice job. Had to go all the way back to 1927 for that one. You didn't happen to Google that, did you olaf?
Where did I say that the key to reducing gun violence was making an individual turn over 1 of 2 guns? Or that doing that would have prevented any of those crimes? I have said there are too many guns and that i could nit think of a reasonable for people stickpiling weapkns, but where did i say what you are claiming?
Guns need to be less available in society. Simple. Not even sure how any reasonable person could deny that when you look at the number if guns versus gun owners and the number of gun deaths in this country versus other civilized societies.
Cars, prescription drugs, alcohol and tobacco each kill far more people per year than guns,
Quote from: Escobar06 on February 09, 2013, 03:53:52 PMCars, prescription drugs, alcohol and tobacco each kill far more people per year than guns, Cars, prescription drugs, alcohol, and tobacco are also more stringently regulated than guns. Yet unlike guns, they aren't made for the expressed purpose of killing people. Go figure. I also wonder how many people drive, smoke, drink, or use prescription drugs as opposed to how many people own firearms. My guess is more all around. Lots more.
Quote from: CBWx2 on February 09, 2013, 08:21:00 PMQuote from: Escobar06 on February 09, 2013, 03:53:52 PMCars, prescription drugs, alcohol and tobacco each kill far more people per year than guns, Cars, prescription drugs, alcohol, and tobacco are also more stringently regulated than guns. Yet unlike guns, they aren't made for the expressed purpose of killing people. Go figure. I also wonder how many people drive, smoke, drink, or use prescription drugs as opposed to how many people own firearms. My guess is more all around. Lots more.I believe that first sentence is a stretch.
Guns are not made with the express purpose of killing people either.
And Vin, why does what you think matter regarding people and their desire to collect weapons? Because you can't think of a reason people should do it, that means they shouldn't do it? Interesting. What about people who collect knives and/or swords? Does someone need to have 15 samurai swords hanging on their wall? No, in fact that makes much less sense than someone owning 15 guns...does that mean they shouldn't be allowed to do it? I'd bet that far more people die per year in stabbings than in mass shootings with "assault rifles". Where is your outrage over knife and sword ownership?
Guns are not made with the express purpose of killing people.