| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#92
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What the 'ell??
In article 756875686378760670.676437bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On 12/31/12 5:24 PM, thumper wrote: On 12/31/2012 1:23 PM, Califbill wrote: See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. If they tried that here you'd shoot him? Bilious Bill thinks the army of NRA members, once it emerges from its beer-induced stupor in the woods deer hunting expedition, will be able to stage a successful insurrection against the forces of the United States. More likely, they'll shoot each other. Why does Harry Reid carry a concealed handgun? Cite? Same as Feinstien's bodyguard carrying a submachine gun. I didn't ask for cite for Feinstien's bodyguard. I asked for a cite for the allegation that Harry Reid carries a concealed handgun. |
|
#93
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
In article 975696028378760049.779817bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. The murder rate in England is about one third the US. Guns are very tightly controlled, so the weapon of choice is different. Robbery and assault are at a higher rate than the US. Remove the drug war shootings, and our rate would plummet. New York has always had a higher murder rate, and had control a decade earlier than England. We are also a country that was settled by people with a more aggressive tendency. One third??? Can you do any math?? Okay, population wise, England and Wales, is ONE SIXTH of the U.S. In TWO years in the U.K. there were 39 deaths. In the U.S. there were 12,000 in ONE year. Now do tell how that math ratio comes out to 1/3....... |
|
#94
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 975696028378760049.779817bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. The murder rate in England is about one third the US. Guns are very tightly controlled, so the weapon of choice is different. Robbery and assault are at a higher rate than the US. Remove the drug war shootings, and our rate would plummet. New York has always had a higher murder rate, and had control a decade earlier than England. We are also a country that was settled by people with a more aggressive tendency. One third??? Can you do any math?? Okay, population wise, England and Wales, is ONE SIXTH of the U.S. In TWO years in the U.K. there were 39 deaths. In the U.S. there were 12,000 in ONE year. Now do tell how that math ratio comes out to 1/3....... How many murders in England? Not just firearms. |
|
#95
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 1167605627378760474.634463bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1268645888378694356.654977bmckeenospam- , says... ESAD wrote: On 12/31/12 5:24 PM, thumper wrote: On 12/31/2012 1:23 PM, Califbill wrote: See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. If they tried that here you'd shoot him? Bilious Bill thinks the army of NRA members, once it emerges from its beer-induced stupor in the woods deer hunting expedition, will be able to stage a successful insurrection against the forces of the United States. More likely, they'll shoot each other. Actually only takes one shooter to really change history. WW1 started with one shooter. Biggest change in US history was probably Sirhan Sirhan. He gave us Nixon, Carter, Reagan. Sirhan had the ability to read and act into the future, altering what happens? How? You have no analytic ability. Bobbie Kennedy would have been President, and that would have changed the following Presidents, and those three made some of the biggest changes in the country. Not all for the good. Oh, so YOU can predict what has never happened. You know for a fact that Bobby would have been president HOW? Do you realize that, just like Sirhan, that could have been stymied in any manner of ways? Heart attack? Decision to not run? Idiot! |
|
#96
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 707354998378760787.458258bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. Cars kill people, we need to limit cars, especially those evil SUVs. Do you really, I mean really fall for that ignorant rhetoric?? Every time I hear a far right wing NRA whack job spew that **** I always think, I wonder if that individual is really that stupid.... Read the paper or listen to the reporters. Is always an SUV killing or causing the accident. Not the fact the driver was an idiot, or drunk, or even the fact the other car caused the accident. If an SUV was involved, is always identified. Okay, let me try to put in so that even you can understand it. What is the purpose and intent in owning an SUV? Is it to kill something or someone? Now ask the same question about someone owning a gun. Do people own guns to get from point A to point B? Do people own assault weapons to carry groceries or take the kids to baseball practice? Now doesn't that above bull**** sound silly? Apples and oranges. |
|
#97
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
In article 766682593378769453.001525bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 975696028378760049.779817bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. The murder rate in England is about one third the US. Guns are very tightly controlled, so the weapon of choice is different. Robbery and assault are at a higher rate than the US. Remove the drug war shootings, and our rate would plummet. New York has always had a higher murder rate, and had control a decade earlier than England. We are also a country that was settled by people with a more aggressive tendency. One third??? Can you do any math?? Okay, population wise, England and Wales, is ONE SIXTH of the U.S. In TWO years in the U.K. there were 39 deaths. In the U.S. there were 12,000 in ONE year. Now do tell how that math ratio comes out to 1/3....... How many murders in England? Not just firearms. Psssst, we are talking about firearms and the availability of such..... sheesh. |
|
#98
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
In article 1149199699378769382.852405bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 707354998378760787.458258bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. Cars kill people, we need to limit cars, especially those evil SUVs. Do you really, I mean really fall for that ignorant rhetoric?? Every time I hear a far right wing NRA whack job spew that **** I always think, I wonder if that individual is really that stupid.... Read the paper or listen to the reporters. Is always an SUV killing or causing the accident. Not the fact the driver was an idiot, or drunk, or even the fact the other car caused the accident. If an SUV was involved, is always identified. Okay, let me try to put in so that even you can understand it. What is the purpose and intent in owning an SUV? Is it to kill something or someone? Now ask the same question about someone owning a gun. Do people own guns to get from point A to point B? Do people own assault weapons to carry groceries or take the kids to baseball practice? Now doesn't that above bull**** sound silly? Apples and oranges. EXACTLY!!! Now you are getting why it is such a stupid argument. |
|
#99
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
In article 201055824378769422.069152bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1167605627378760474.634463bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1268645888378694356.654977bmckeenospam- , says... ESAD wrote: On 12/31/12 5:24 PM, thumper wrote: On 12/31/2012 1:23 PM, Califbill wrote: See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. If they tried that here you'd shoot him? Bilious Bill thinks the army of NRA members, once it emerges from its beer-induced stupor in the woods deer hunting expedition, will be able to stage a successful insurrection against the forces of the United States. More likely, they'll shoot each other. Actually only takes one shooter to really change history. WW1 started with one shooter. Biggest change in US history was probably Sirhan Sirhan. He gave us Nixon, Carter, Reagan. Sirhan had the ability to read and act into the future, altering what happens? How? You have no analytic ability. Bobbie Kennedy would have been President, and that would have changed the following Presidents, and those three made some of the biggest changes in the country. Not all for the good. Oh, so YOU can predict what has never happened. You know for a fact that Bobby would have been president HOW? Do you realize that, just like Sirhan, that could have been stymied in any manner of ways? Heart attack? Decision to not run? Idiot! Well, do tell then, how are you certain without a doubt that if not for Sirhan that Bobby would have been president......... |
|
#100
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 1149199699378769382.852405bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 707354998378760787.458258bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. Cars kill people, we need to limit cars, especially those evil SUVs. Do you really, I mean really fall for that ignorant rhetoric?? Every time I hear a far right wing NRA whack job spew that **** I always think, I wonder if that individual is really that stupid.... Read the paper or listen to the reporters. Is always an SUV killing or causing the accident. Not the fact the driver was an idiot, or drunk, or even the fact the other car caused the accident. If an SUV was involved, is always identified. Okay, let me try to put in so that even you can understand it. What is the purpose and intent in owning an SUV? Is it to kill something or someone? Now ask the same question about someone owning a gun. Do people own guns to get from point A to point B? Do people own assault weapons to carry groceries or take the kids to baseball practice? Now doesn't that above bull**** sound silly? Apples and oranges. EXACTLY!!! Now you are getting why it is such a stupid argument. No, I see why it is stupid to argue with an idiot like you. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| What the 'ell! | General | |||
| What the 'ell is goin' on in Connecticut? | General | |||
| W'ell all need thicker foul weather jackets | ASA | |||
| W'ell all need thicker foul weather jackets | ASA | |||
| O/T - US going to *ell in a handbasket! | General | |||
![iBoaterer[_2_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
