Bought a Russian Saiga AK47.

[dandjdad]

Originally Posted by westside24

Im still waiting to hear how the government would go about getting the guns off the streets? you said there attempt was half assed to get drugs off the street, it would be the same attempt to get guns off the street.... point being that no matter how hard the law tries, the guns wont get off the streets (making it a half assed attempt according to you) So I wanna hear what you propose they would do to make a full fledged effort?


please I just want n answer.... an answer for me would be like AA from this thread.

Ah westy, you don't really know how to take a hint, do you? Okay, fine. Here's what I initally wrote:

...getting all illegal drugs off the streets has really been kind of a half-assed attempt, hasn't it? Not to say that "trying" to get all guns off the streets wouldn't be any less of a half-assed attempt, though.

And here was your response:

Not a half assed attempt... how would you propose they get it all off the streets? with batons and mase? or just kindly asking criminals to hand it over on a public anouncment?

I mean, seriously, what the hell does your response even mean in the context of what I wrote? I asked you to re-type it out in proper English, but you never took me up on it. I'm sorry, but I've reread this post like twenty times and I still don't know what point you're trying to get across. That's why I never answered you; I mean, I don't speak gibberish, and I'm not here to be an elementary school grammar or spelling teacher.

But whatever. You seem pretty harmless. I even tried to be nice to you the first time, suggesting you go back and reread my post and try to get a better comprehension of what I was saying. That was your out. (Especially considering that the question you're asking me to answer is something I never implied to have the answer to. Never. Not once.) Now, if you actually did do as I suggested (and, in turn, still tried to ask me the same question you asked me the first time) then I suspect you may have a fairly severe reading comprehension problem.

Then, as if to add further fuel to the fire, you misconstrue what "per capita" data is; (And believe me, once you exposed yourself like this to me, you lost what little credibility you had in my eyes, and I basically just began to kind of skim over what you wrote.) BUT THEN--to top everything else off--after I make it abundantly clear in the post above that my involvement in this thread has ended, you direct the very same question you've asked already to me numerous times in the very next post. I mean, what's your deal? Like I said, I was trying to be nice to you and give you an out, but now I really have to question if you actually have the ability to properly process any information that you read.

So that's about all I have to say to that, my friend. If you still have any trouble comprehending the point I'm trying to get across in this post, well, I just don't know what to tell you, dude.

I now return you to the rest of this thread. Have a ball, guys...

[dandjdad]

Now, since my exit strategy for this thread is more faulty that Bush's exit strategy in Iraq, I thought I'd try something new. Just so I may finally put this thread behind me once and for all, my response to all further questions that call me out will be to post a link to an individual or group of individuals whose lives definitely would have been better were guns not present in the US or, at the very least, were gun control laws stricter in the US.

Thus, because somehow she happened to cause so much debate on this board, I would like the first name I invoke to be none other that that three-year-old I told you about before; funny thing is, as it may have been erroneously implied previously, it wasn't a drive-by shooting that was the cause of her life sentence in a wheelchair--it was a circumstance much, much worse and way more scary.

Please be sure to read the article all the way through (or at least through to the first paragraph of page 2). Other Boston shooting victims and statistics are listed; be sure to pay special attention to the one who was snuffed out at the ripe old age of 10.

So in honor of her bravery in a world gone (gun) crazy, I give you Kai Leigh Harriott.

[westside24]

Originally Posted by dandjdad

I mean, seriously, what the hell does your response even mean in the context of what I wrote? I asked you to re-type it out in proper English, but you never took me up on it. I'm sorry, but I've reread this post like twenty times and I still don't know what point you're trying to get across. That's why I never answered you; I mean, I don't speak gibberish, and I'm not here to be an elementary school grammar or spelling teacher.

But whatever. You seem pretty harmless. I even tried to be nice to you the first time, suggesting you go back and reread my post and try to get a better comprehension of what I was saying. That was your out. (Especially considering that the question you're asking me to answer is something I never implied to have the answer to. Never. Not once.) Now, if you actually did do as I suggested (and, in turn, still tried to ask me the same question you asked me the first time) then I suspect you may have a fairly severe reading comprehension problem.

Then, as if to add further fuel to the fire, you misconstrue what "per capita" data is; (And believe me, once you exposed yourself like this to me, you lost what little credibility you had in my eyes, and I basically just began to kind of skim over what you wrote.) BUT THEN--to top everything else off--after I make it abundantly clear in the post above that my involvement in this thread has ended, you direct the very same question you've asked already to me numerous times in the very next post. I mean, what's your deal? Like I said, I was trying to be nice to you and give you an out, but now I really have to question if you actually have the ability to properly process any information that you read.

So that's about all I have to say to that, my friend. If you still have any trouble comprehending the point I'm trying to get across in this post, well, I just don't know what to tell you, dude.

I now return you to the rest of this thread. Have a ball, guys...

I do not see how what im writing is not english? granted I may not have the perfect grammar and and literature and the large vocabulary you use, but its a god damn thread about guns. I really dont give a **** what my writing looks like, or what it makes you think of me.
I have read the whole thread from the beginning.
I am NOT implying that you have or ever had the answer to my question. I do not have a severe reading comprehension problem.
I did not MISCONSTRUE per capita murders between two countries, I was just saying because you said the same thing about the town outside of atlanta compared to N.Y. or whatever the hell V said earlier, and remember you said. Please tell me you are not comparing the crime rates between those two. how do you know it wasnt the crime rate% per capita!

I Asked the same question, as I will now, because I have not gotten a F!!!ing answer.

HOW WOULD YOU REMOVE ALL GUNS FROM AMERICA? <---In perfect english

If you cannot answer this question then I will assume that banning guns from america cannot be done. Ive been trying to say that It cannot be done from the get-go, therefore making it pointless to even try to ban guns from america. You said you can come up with so much evidence to counter anything weve said and to prove otherwise.
Prove that it can get done, Prove that if america tried it could actually clean up all the guns around the country, prove that it wont be just a half assed attempt like getting drugs off the streets.
I was just trying to help set you up with a good question to answer so you could have a little more proof for the NRA folks and your battle against the whole DF, because so far youve sounded nothing more than a whinny ass b!!!!

I can take a hint, you a very rude damn person, Because until this post, I was prolly the only person in here who kept an open mind to what you were saying. I can take a hint, you wont answer a legit question.

Go watch your re-runs of Rosie Odonell show, you crack pot

[Gooseneck]

Keep it clean fellas.

[Firehawk]

Originally Posted by westside24

I do not see how what im writing is not english? granted I may not have the perfect grammar and and literature and the large vocabulary you use, but its a god damn thread about guns. I really dont give a **** what my writing looks like, or what it makes you think of me.
I have read the whole thread from the beginning.
I am NOT implying that you have or ever had the answer to my question. I do not have a severe reading comprehension problem.
I did not MISCONSTRUE per capita murders between two countries, I was just saying because you said the same thing about the town outside of atlanta compared to N.Y. or whatever the hell V said earlier, and remember you said. Please tell me you are not comparing the crime rates between those two. how do you know it wasnt the crime rate% per capita!

I Asked the same question, as I will now, because I have not gotten a F!!!ing answer.

HOW WOULD YOU REMOVE ALL GUNS FROM AMERICA? <---In perfect english

If you cannot answer this question then I will assume that banning guns from america cannot be done. Ive been trying to say that It cannot be done from the get-go, therefore making it pointless to even try to ban guns from america. You said you can come up with so much evidence to counter anything weve said and to prove otherwise.
Prove that it can get done, Prove that if america tried it could actually clean up all the guns around the country, prove that it wont be just a half assed attempt like getting drugs off the streets.
I was just trying to help set you up with a good question to answer so you could have a little more proof for the NRA folks and your battle against the whole DF, because so far youve sounded nothing more than a whinny ass b!!!!

I can take a hint, you a very rude damn person, Because until this post, I was prolly the only person in here who kept an open mind to what you were saying. I can take a hint, you wont answer a legit question.

Go watch your re-runs of Rosie Odonell show, you crack pot

Don't let yourself get upset over some guy that implies insults or tries to make you feel stupid by attacking your typing skills/English skills/punctuation skills/grammar skills. My mother has some of the worst typing and punctuation skills but yet she would school most any one of us on this board with her street-smarts. This is what people do when they don't know how to respond, or have no answer for you (oops there's a double negative). Just remember that you have the upper hand in the discussion right now, Westside. He is avoiding your question for a reason.

I, too, am also hoping he responds with suggestions to your question.

[dandjdad]

Originally Posted by westside24

IHOW WOULD YOU REMOVE ALL GUNS FROM AMERICA? <---In perfect english

If you cannot answer this question then I will assume that banning guns from america cannot be done.

Why? Do you think that I am the only person who can answer that? Am I the expert on banning guns in America? Am I the only person capable of a solution? There's thousands of people a lot smarter with me with a lot more experience in taking guns off the streets who can probably answer your question better than I. Why don't you ask them?

But, just off the top of my head, I'd stop manufacturing and selling new guns in this country. I'd up gun laws and increase penalties for having any illegal or unregistered guns in the house. I'd institute an aggressive, no questions asked buyback program. I'd make the mandatory waiting period a lot longer than it is now, and with a lot more restrictions. Eventually, everything would be phased out. Again, these are just ideas off the top of my head. I'm sure more knowledgeable folks than me can think of about a dozen more.

Originally Posted by westside24

I was just trying to help set you up with a good question to answer so you could have a little more proof for the NRA folks and your battle against the whole DF, because so far youve sounded nothing more than a whinny ass b!!!!

Good analysis.

Originally Posted by westside24

Go watch your re-runs of Rosie Odonell show, you crack pot

I'll watch watching these reruns only if you start listening to Michael Savage and reading Ann Coulter.

[dandjdad]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

This is what people do when they don't know how to respond, or have no answer for you (oops there's a double negative). Just remember that you have the upper hand in the discussion right now, Westside. He is avoiding your question for a reason.

I, too, am also hoping he responds with suggestions to your question.

Your wish is my command, Hawk...see my prevoius post to westy. And don't fool yourselves. You guys don't have the upper hand in anything. You all haven't proven one damn thing. You haven't shown me evidence to show why gun ownership makes for a safer America. All you folks have done so far is regurgitate what the NRA shoves down your throat. That's nothing.

I, on the other hand, have proven many times why the saturation of guns in this country is detrimental to the country. Advantage, me.

Speaking of which, I think it's time to present part II of "An individual or group of individuals whose lives definitely would have been better were guns not present in the US or, at the very least, were gun control laws stricter in the US".

This one will be fun, because it's someone that even you gun lovers just may have heard of...

[Firehawk]

Originally Posted by dandjdad

Why? Do you think that I am the only person who can answer that? Am I the expert on banning guns in America? Am I the only person capable of a solution? There's thousands of people a lot smarter with me with a lot more experience in taking guns off the streets who can probably answer your question better than I. Why don't you ask them?

But, just off the top of my head, I'd stop manufacturing new guns in this country. I'd up gun laws and increase penalties for having any illegal or unregistered guns in the house. I'd institute an aggressive buyback program. I'd make the mandatory waiting period a lot longer than it is now, and with more restrictions. Eventually, everything would be phased out. Again, these are ideas off the top of my head. I'm sure more knowledgeable folks than me can think of about a dozen more.

Good analysis.

Does Rosie O'Donnell have a new show? I thought it was cancelled sometime in the mid 1990's. Way to keep up with the times, bro.

First of all, he asked YOU because you're the one that made the claim. Second, we aren't discussing this with all those other people that are alot smarter than you out there.

Let's look at your suggestions:

"I'd stop manufacturing new guns in this country". I mean, this is the same logic that people who argue for getting rid of the militiary. No military = everyone attacks our country = we all start speaking a different language. Besides, how does this stop imported weapons from getting into the country? Perhaps another suggestion answered that one...and on we go.

"I'd up gun laws and increase penalties for having any illegal or unregistered guns in the house." To what? This doesn't work as it is. Illegal guns often aren't found until crimes have already been committed and the criminal caught. This doesn't prevent the criminal from acquiring the gun in the first place.

"I'd institute an aggressive buyback program." Like what?

"I'd make the mandatory waiting period a lot longer than it is now, and with more restrictions." Waiting period for what? I thought you wanted to get rid of all guns, but now with this suggestion you are still permitting a gun to be owned? I don't get that one.

"Eventually, everything would be phased out." I don't think you can draw that conclusion based on your suggestions.

[Firehawk]

Originally Posted by dandjdad

Your wish is my command, Hawk...see my prevoius post to westy. And don't fool yourselves. You guys don't have the upper hand in anything. You all haven't proven one damn thing. All you've done so far is regurgitate what the NRA shoves down your throat.

Speaking of which, I think it's time to present part II of "An individual or group of individuals whose lives definitely would have been better were guns not present in the US or, at the very least, were gun control laws stricter in the US".

This one will be fun, because it's someone that even you gun lovers just may have heard of...

And what have you proven?

And for the record, I don't even own a gun. Never have, but probably will eventually, but not for collector reasons, but for protection, 'just in case'. I just simply don't agree with you, "And that's the bottom line, because STONE COLD SAID SO".

[dandjdad]

See Hawk, this is exactly why I didn't want to answer westy's question...because I knew I'd be dragged into another debate. I've said multiple times that I'm sick of this thread, and I want out. Yet, you people keep dragging me back in. That's the only reason I avoided his question. Also, I knew that even if I provided completely valid suggestions, you'd want more and more and more information from me. Okay, here goes:

[quote]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

"I'd stop manufacturing new guns in this country". I mean, this is the same logic that people who argue for getting rid of the militiary. No military = everyone attacks our country = we all start speaking a different language. Besides, how does this stop imported weapons from getting into the country? Perhaps another suggestion answered that one...and on we go.

Not the same logic at all. Please explain what you mean. (See how this works, Hawk? Are you exhausted explaining things yet?) I'm referring to private citizen ownership, not the military. Always have been.

"I'd up gun laws and increase penalties for having any illegal or unregistered guns in the house." To what?

Higher than they are now. How's that?

This doesn't work as it is. Illegal guns often aren't found until crimes have already been committed and the criminal caught. This doesn't prevent the criminal from acquiring the gun in the first place.

Neither does the death penalty prevent people from committing capital murder, but I'd bet dollars to donuts you love the death penalty, don't you Hawk?

"I'd institute an aggressive buyback program." Like what?

Again, I can't provide specifics. A lot of variables would have to be examined.

"I'd make the mandatory waiting period a lot longer than it is now, and with more restrictions." Waiting period for what? I thought you wanted to get rid of all guns, but now with this suggestion you are still permitting a gun to be owned? I don't get that one.

This was just an addendum. I envision this to be a phased thing over several years, so probably just in the early years.

"Eventually, everything would be phased out." I don't think you can draw that conclusion based on your suggestions.

I might not have written this clearly enough...please see my previous response.

[dandjdad]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

I just simply don't agree with you, "And that's the bottom line, because STONE COLD SAID SO".

This is what I have been saying for the last five pages or so, but you people won't let me get out of this thread. What, are you more legitimate than me because you punctuated what you said with a quote from SCSA, while I merely quoted Andy?

[dandjdad]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

And what have you proven?

Hawk, if you don't know by now what I've proven, you never will.

But you know what, Hawk...maybe you're right. The ease of availability of firearms for every citizens just might be a good thing--not only for individuals, but for society as well.

Ha ha. Naw, I'm just playing. And I know of another guy who wished guns were a bit harder to get ahold of--and he just happens to be part III of "An individual or group of individuals whose lives definitely would have been better were guns not present in the US or, at the very least, were gun control laws stricter in the US".

This one you should definitely know...after all, there's a holiday named for him.

[Gooseneck]

Originally Posted by dandjdad

See Hawk, this is exactly why I didn't want to answer westy's question...because I knew I'd be dragged into another debate. I've said multiple times that I'm sick of this thread, and I want out. Yet, you people keep dragging me back in.

There's no such thing as "E-shackles", so you can leave whenever you want. You keep posting because what others are saying is intriguing enough to respond to. Lets face it, you like this thread.

[maverick]

dandjdad, these links you keep listing to people assassinated with guns is really helping you look logical. I understand you are trying to illicit a response and get people to think, but this is insinuating that unstable people weren't dangerous before they got a gun in their hands.

I didn't read all your posts, but Lennon was killed at point blank range. Seems to me the psycho could just as easily stabbed him had a gun been harder to get.

[dandjdad]

Originally Posted by Gooseneck

There's no such thing as "E-shackles", so you can leave whenever you want. You keep posting because what others are saying is intriguing enough to respond to. Lets face it, you like this thread.

Apparently. However, just to reiterate, I like it the same way a crack addict likes his crack...