Just overlook the fact that they've routinely been against background checks and mental health databases in the past. Anything to switch the focus off their bread and butter.

You don't have to own a gun. It's the safer route for you and your family. Important difference between the patriot act and this weird rfid gun control method.

Rjoe do you seriously not see the risk in creating a national mental health database? Hell, we can't even do a sex offender registry well.

You don't have to use a phone. You don't have to use a library. Your argument is invalid.

You pretty much have to use a phone though. It's pretty much a requirement of being in modern society. Guns on the other hand....

pretty much the only thing you have to do is eat and drink water and stay warm in the winter.

It's almost like you actually want to live in a horrible world.

Right, so when the local klan dues are collected by the government, and the mobs are either tacitly approved by or even made of officials, they aren't fighting the government. Not to mention their are several police officer shootings. You're full of **** and either didn't read the article or are hoping no one else did.

Good thing this was never claimed by anyone. Your position isn't that individuals shouldn't have to be slaughtered while the overall peaceful movement moves on.... Right?

Lol k fly. A better troll effort than your last piece of ****, but silly insults towards me is all you really have at this point.

No you don't. It's just something you want to use, so you actually care if that right gets trampled on. You're making an argument that is ludicrously hypocritical that could be used against anything you like if a bunch of people who disagreed with you came to power. Seems like a solid idea.

Sure I see the risks and I don't like the idea but what exactly does that have to do with my post?

The point was that the NRA basically came out and blamed everyone and everything else while at the same time trying to say 'don't blame guns!' and coming out in support of things they've vehemently been against very recently.

In other words: lol NRA

Aright simple misunderstanding.

fwiw, pierce morgan did get owned in that video.

But not because his argument sucked...because HE sucks at delivering an argument without degenerating into a ranting idiot.

Had he actually done his job and prepared for the totally expected answers that most freshman in high school could have seen coming a mile away, he could have done some real good....

....but he didn't

Guns don't kill people, libraries kill people.

How many of them were Tea Partiers? but really, Who cares? What do you think that proves? That the 2nd amendment is effective for preventing the govt from infringing upon everyones "fundamental right to privacy?" It clearly doesn't. Do you think the 2A is effective at preventing infringement of fundamental rights in general? Lets ask AAA or his cousin what they think. Oh, wait, we can't because our government ****ing vaporized them for posting YouTube videos they didnt like. Not even a semblance of due process was given them, but once again the Knights of Liberty were ****** cheering it on.

The notion that the 2A is fundamental to ensuring that these other rights aren't infringed upon by the government is what is asenine. The hillarious irony is that, as Fly pointed out, during all the major civil rights battles a large portion of the people who clung to their 2A rights believing the nonsense above were fighting on the side of tyranny in every case. Again, the ****ing Patriot Act, that is arguably the biggest infringement on our citizens privacy ( a right that you and most other gun proponents claim is FUNDAMENTAL) in the history of the country, passed right under the noses of all these people who are keen on fighting back tyrannical government, yet most of you didn't lift a finger much less reach for your amazing stockpiles of guns. In fact, more people saw Obama's election as a tyranny more worthy of revolution than the Patriot Act. So gun proponents' objections to pragmatic attempts to reduce tens of thousands of preventable, tragic deaths a year on the grounds that it may infringe a right they think is fundamental, or it would some how hinder their vigilant efforts to protect our citizens from tyrannical democratic election of black presidents would be hillarious if it wasn't so damn sad.

Today's NYT editorial makes a good point about why giving everyone CCL's is not desirable.

Additionally, look at all the people revolting against Obama! It's funny how your standard changes as you please.

I'm not making the argument that they should put RFID chips in guns because I don't think it would work. Just want to make that clear.

I am making the argument that it is nothing like the patriot act. I do not care about gun ownership rights at all, that is correct. It is a solid idea because it will lead to a safer society. A safer society that does not cost us and worthwhile rights. Like fly has said many times over. Gun ownership does not stop the government from imposing it's will on the people in negative ways. Random citizens with glocks and a couple hundred rounds of ammo taking on governments is a myth that you should get out of your head.

Your claim that a person can get by in the USA without a phone is absurd. I need to have a phone line of some sort to hold down any job. Not even a good job. Unless I want to work as a day laborer I am going to need a phone. Even then I am sure it helps to have some type of phone. Off the grid living is not really an option worth debating.

This is, again, a ****ing dumb argument. My straight flush draw didn't get there, I shouldn't have called getting 5-1! I don't have a solid idea of how good of a chance that officer had of hitting the shooter, but it's far more than zero and the best chance those soon-to-be dead kids had to get out alive.

I'm more interested in what % do you think would be required for a officer to hit or stop the shooter in this spot for it to be reasonable for him to be there. Personally, I think it's an overreaction to dictate that every school needs guns wielded by trained officers regardless, but this line of argumentation is seriously flawed if you can't answer the question.

I've yet to see a mob storming the capitol, and then surrounding the Whitehouse demanding the president abdicate his position. Nice usage of revolt = disagree

lol ikes

Except for, you know, all the times that it did.
rofl I never came close to saying this. Cool story though. I guess the magic line for if CC supports banning something is if it stops someone from getting a job! Political speech isn't necessary to get a job, I can ban it if it's bad!

What could go wrong?

Lol cheney doctrine itt. Nonzero chance that guys a terrorist because he wears a turban? Off to guantanamo with him!

The whole point is that this hasn't happened and no one has taken up arms against 'Obama's government' cres. Nice fail though, gave me a chuckle.

Seems like an odd question since the point of the quote was that cops are supposed to be better trained than the average citizen and if cops are missing and hitting other people (making a situation worse sometimes) what happens when 5 CCW folks open up at someone in a mall, or other crowded location.

You might want to read a post before responding. Specifically, the part where I say it's an overreaction.