NY Proposal to Screw Gun Owner's a Little Bit Further

uk_dave said:
Oh gawd, you got me Chuck, bang to rights and no mistake.
I was so hopin' you wouldn't play the knife gambit, but yous too smart for me.

Though I would 'ave **** me pants if you'd asked about cricket bat insurance. oh lummy.

Still, gotta hand it to ya guvn'r, no one can makes an argument comparing apples and turnips like a gun rights proponent can.

'ats on, about turn. Quick march........
Click to expand...

What part of "making law-abiding folks pay for other peoples criminal activity is morally wrong" do you not understand?

Do you prefer to administer justice at the group rather than the individual level? (And rather unscientific, arbitrary groupings at that).
 
Last edited:
Nessie (as well as myself and others) wondered out loud how once legal guns end up as illegal guns.

Reading this article, part of this answer comes up:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/02/burglary-is-reality-for-tv-show-gun-shop/
The Gunsmoke Guns caper is the latest in a flood of gun thefts nationwide documented by the Department of Justice.

The statistics for commercial thefts show that nearly 25,000 guns per year are lost or stolen from gun dealers.

According to the ATF, more than 4,000 gun stores and retailers have been targeted in the last three years, with 74,000 guns reported stolen or lost.
Click to expand...

I dunno about y'all...but that's a lot of *********** guns being stolen from gun stores.
 
FWIW - There is currently an organized "Gun Rally" in the NY State capital of Albany going on right now. People are marching to have the NY SAFE Act repealed.

There is a local radio broadcaster there that estimates the crowd to be 5-6,000 people and more are flooding in by the minute.

Our fearless Governor is avoiding the rally at all costs. Spineless.
 
Sabretooth said:
FWIW - There is currently an organized "Gun Rally" in the NY State capital of Albany going on right now. People are marching to have the NY SAFE Act repealed.

There is a local radio broadcaster there that estimates the crowd to be 5-6,000 people and more are flooding in by the minute.

Our fearless Governor is avoiding the rally at all costs. Spineless.
Click to expand...

It's evidence that no matter what good people and especially parents of children at risk try to do to fix the situation, the gungoons will resist just for the sake of being contrary. It's really not as if they are being threatened or their rights are being threatened in the least.

And it's the reason they love the Nugent clown. He's the king of contrary.
 
GeeMack said:
jarjarmini14.jpg
Click to expand...
Thank you!

Stupid gungoons, never liked them.
 
It's amateur hour in Albany:

New York will change its newly toughened gun law so military-style rifles and high-capacity semiautomatic handguns can be used on the sets of TV shows and movies.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo and legislators say Wednesday they'll exempt the productions in New York from bans they rushed into law as the first in the nation after the Newtown school massacre.

They must also quickly fix another error that could soon put police officers carrying high-capacity magazines in violation of the law.
Click to expand...

You really can't make this stuff up.
 
Nessie said:
Are you referring to the NY proposal, or the proposal for insurance like car insurance myself and others have been proposing or both?
Click to expand...

Both. Requiring insurance to exercise a right is wrong, and goes against our constitution.
 
Nessie said:
No it doesn't, even a small number of irresponsible gun owners is too many and action is needed to reduce that number and save lives.
Click to expand...

So(and please correct me if I'm wrong), you're actually saying that any number of irresponsible acts by gun owners is too many.
Do you apply this philosophy to everything, or do you just single out firearms?
I'm beginning to think that your protest has less to do with saving lives than with banning those evil-scary-bangy-things.
 
Chuck Guiteau said:
So(and please correct me if I'm wrong), you're actually saying that any number of irresponsible acts by gun owners is too many.
Do you apply this philosophy to everything, or do you just single out firearms?
I'm beginning to think that your protest has less to do with saving lives than with banning those evil-scary-bangy-things.
Click to expand...

Nessie is not saying 'any', Nessie is saying a 'small' number and is totally right about that. Any is a totally different thing. Please try to read carefully as it's really a waste of time having to correct you.
 
uk_dave said:
Oh gawd, you got me Chuck, bang to rights and no mistake.
I was so hopin' you wouldn't play the knife gambit, but yous too smart for me.

Though I would 'ave **** me pants if you'd asked about cricket bat insurance. oh lummy.

Still, gotta hand it to ya guvn'r, no one can makes an argument comparing apples and turnips like a gun rights proponent can.

'ats on, about turn. Quick march........
Click to expand...
Apples to oranges?
The point that many have tried to make on this topic is that:
Knives are dangerous if not handled with care and attention.
People other than the knife owner can be injured because of this.
Those injuries have a cost which at the moment society as a whole is picking up.
The core reason for those costs is the ability of citizens to bear knives.
Therefore the cost of bearing knives should adequately reflect the cost of that right to society as a whole

Looks like apples to apples to me.
Unless you want to make the case that there are no violent crimes committed with knives in the UK.
If, OTOH, you do have a problem with robberies, home invasions, etc. by people who use a knife as a weapon, then why don't you require people who own knives to purchase insurance against using them for criminal purposes? That is exactly what the proposed legislation involves.
 
Chuck Guiteau said:
...

I'm beginning to think that your protest has less to do with saving lives than with banning those evil-scary-bangy-things.
Click to expand...
When did you first notice? I'd say it's been evident for weeks now, and it's many AGs.
 
monty1 said:
Nessie is not saying 'any', Nessie is saying a 'small' number and is totally right about that. Any is a totally different thing. Please try to read carefully as it's really a waste of time having to correct you.
Click to expand...
She said "even a small number" which excludes "small numbers" as well.
But Nessie can speak for herself, and if she agrees with you she can be a little more precise with the number. Like, say, less than 1 in 10,000, or less than 1 in 50,000, or whatever she means.
I apologize for wasting so much of your time by having to correct me, monty, as I realize it would be better spent defending your own positions, many of which we are still waiting on proof from you.
But conversely, I don't mind correcting you at all, and I spend a lot more time on it than you do.
Should I mention a few of the more recent ones, or have you "forgotten" them?
 
Chuck Guiteau said:
I don't know one way or the other. If Nessie is really Nestor, then whoever is behind the avatar can let me know. I wasn't trying to be insulting by using the female tense.
Click to expand...

Probably a reference to the loch ness monster rather than an actual name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom