LOLikes

lol wut

you asked for a cite on guns being used for defensive purposes. I provided a link to such a study earlier today. Guns being used in the real world for self defense is not a fantasy.

Chicagoans can get handguns right now. Unless they can't afford a cab, in which case they probably can't afford a gun either.

****ing VAST MAJORITIES, HOW DO THEY WORK?



I can speak for myself in saying that I've never supported a handgun ban. AFAICT same goes for most of the other people itt that support stronger gun laws. The last like 2 months itt have been dedicated to reiterating, over and over again, that the gun grabbers aren't coming to your door. You're lumping any gun reform other than status quo into GUN CONTROL SIDE.

At least the gun nuts ITT are now being honest that what they are really scared of is the wholly nonexistent threat of the government compiling a database of gun owners so that they can at some point take their guns or something. Nevermind that all these TRUE PATRIOT DEFENDERS OF THE CONSTITUTION sat on their collective asses when the federal government ROUNDED UP JAPANESE PEOPLE, TOOK THEIR ****, AND THREW THEM IN PRISONS FOR NO REASON.

false. It is illegal to buy a gun in the city. Try again. This doesn't even get into the byzantine bureaucracy one has to jump through, and then never be allowed to take the gun out of the house.

****ING READING HOW DOES IT WORK? Democrats != liberals.
I have gun grabbers literally in my local government. Sorry to burst your bubble. Meanwhile, our president's state senate campaign said he was for a ban on handguns in the 90s. Like gay marriage, it seems likely the president's position has changed due to political realities instead of a genuine change of heart.

buy =/= own. IIRC, it's the gun shops that are banned. So, exactly like I said,
Chicagoans can get handguns right now. Unless they can't afford a cab, in which case they probably can't afford a gun either.


lol semantikes. How many of your non-Democratic liberals exist that handgun bans becomes a serious non-conspiratardian threat in your head even if the vast majority of Democrats, Republicans, and people oppose it? Like, I hope the Green Party doesn't have you trembling in fear over a handgun ban when Democrats talk about magazine capacity limits.

We've reached the point where your definition of gun grabber doesn't really have any credibility anymore. But if it's the words of State Senator Obama from the 90's that has you skeered, the handgun poll conveniently has 1991 poll numbers you can compare to the 2011 numbers and figure that manuver out for yourself.

Just out of curiosity, Ikes. What do you suppose these "gun grabbers" want. What is their goal in taking the guns. DO they want to create a resistance free, fascist sate perhaps?

The vast majority think it will make people safe, just like drug war fighters.

Tell ya what. You can vote, but you have to show an ID, drive an hour away, start an application process that takes a month, then not vote outside of your home. Ever. But you can vote, so stfu.

You're full of ****.

lol semantikes? Wut? I clearly used a word here. All democrats are clearly not liberals, sorry to burst your bubble.

Sigh simple facts of dc and chicago gun bans (plus many others), held back by one supreme court judge retirement, are completely ignored. You really couldn't be less honest.

They just want a world where unicorns gallop through the meadows and farts smell like buttered popcorn. I, too, want this world.

LOL ikes what are you worried about? It's not like some person(s?) ITT has advocated putting nonviolent people in prison for decades.

Never, of course not. Simply owning a hand gun in chicago wasn't a felony until less than three years ago. Chicago hasn't made the process of owning a legal gun a bureaucratic nightmare.

Somebody drag the thread back up the slippery slope please.

LOL, quite ironic after you equate gun rights to voting rights. You aren't even trying.

Now if I had it my way, a lot of Chicago's gun laws wouldn't be in place. Trying to fix the gun market on a state or local level usually ends up being pretty ******ed. But look at the sales rates for the gun shops outside of Chicago post-McDonald. Do you really think the purpose of licensing and training requirements is to CHOKE YOUR FREEDOMS DOWN TO NOTHING?

Dude, three-quarters of the nation is against a handgun ban. That's like as dead in the water as anything you can find these days. Do you really think polling "liberals" would be so different from "Democrats" that the number would move from 37% to VAST MAJORITY and give you cause for fear?

Handicap the odds for me of Heller being overturned AND another state or city-wide handgun ban. Remember that the handgun bans in DC and Chicago were passed in 76' and 82', respectively.

Either way, you're right in the middle of a goalpost shift. I'm being too kind to address you as if you're arguing that a handgun ban is likely. Your argument was that we need to be scared of a federal high-capacity magazine limit because it's a stepping stone to a handgun ban, which is even more nutty.

Bernie Madoff is a nonviolent criminal, apparently locking him up for decades is a travesty

Proponents would argue that it saves lives. You may disagree with that, in wich case feel free to argue the merits of the ban. But simply arguing that any gun control is a slippery slope to gov't siezing your Big Gulp is just lazy.

C'mon, you know as well as anyone else itt that the 2.5 million defence use of guns claim in that link is pure horse **** as it is sourced from the same bull**** study that got decimated ages ago in the thread. Holy **** 2.5 million in 365 days, that is clearly just made up from a flawed study with a crappy sample size then it was multiplied by a big number, it doesnt come close to passing the smell test let alone further investigation.

Plus you know as well as anyone else itt that people who own guns will kill themselves or a loved one more often than use it in self defence. Saying the second amendment is all about sustaining the fantasy that some day people who own guns will use them to blow away a bad guy is accurate as the reality is the second amendment facilitating self defence is a minor side effect from its primary effect of murder, suicide and countless serious injuries.

do you have any hobbies?

like you sit here and argue all day about **** where you just either try to wear them down by being what i hope is intentionally obtuse or make terrible semantic/logical arguments depending on your mood.

That's one thing the gun-folk have never been able to satisfactorily answer for me.

Why do they I want strong gun control?

DBJ thinks I'm dumb so his answer is that I think guns are scawy
Ike/pvn think I want to take away their big gulps
My friend thinks I want to create a fascist resistance free state

None of those things are true. Anyone else have a thought?

I support background checks on the Italian food I purchase when I'm on vacation.

So when I asked if you were going to disregard that study and you got all indignant, you were full of ****?

Color me shocked.

Seriously, it doesn't matter what the number is or how many studies there are, you're just gonna plug your ears.

As for fantasies, so what? Is free speech a bad idea because it makes religion easier to spread?

I don't really care what your motivation is.

Because you want to tell others what they can and cannot do. You believe others are not as intelligent as you and therefore legislation is needed to protect them from their own stupidity. Lets call it the Bloomberg hypothesis.

Once you're gone on vacation THEY'LL COME TAKE YOUR GUNS ldo