NRA RIP

WRONG, again!

 

What is this solution? Using medication prescriptions which you cannot prove works?

 

The outlook for the extremist scam is dismal.

Squinty "Fancy Pants" LaP has been exposed. The operation's fake "charitable" status is being investigated. Already having squandered funds to the point of near bankruptcy, fat cat members who have been bankrolling the racket are hellbent on starving it unless it cleans up its sordid act, and it is immersed in a vicious legal battle with Ackerman McQueen, the pr outfit behind the paranoia-inducing "WAAAA! Big, bad liberals want to take all our precious shooties away!" scare tactic campaign.

Prospects for Americans being abled to democratically address the permissiveness that has made the US the unchallenged firearm fatality champion of the planet have improved.

Weenies who wring their hands and bleat, "We are impotent to confront the gun slaughter!" need to get out of the way.

As a pragmatic matter in determining the most effective legislative measures to reduce the carnage, dispense with the ideological dogma, and consult the empirical data:

State firearm murder rates, 2016, per 100,000 population

Alabama 21.5
Alaska 23.3
Arkansas 17.8
Kentucky 17.5
Louisiana 21.3
Mississippi 19.9
Missouri 19.0
Montana 18.9
Oklahoma 19.6
South Carolina 17.7
Tennessee 17.1
West Virginia 17.5
Wyoming 17.4​

Massachusetts 3.4
Connecticut 4.6
Hawaii 4.5
New Jersey 5.5
New York 4.4
Rhode Island 4.1​

 

kneejerk denialism does not alter factual reality.

 

Nothing kneejerk about it. It starts out at only slightly better than fifty percent ID and goes downhill from that. You keep insisting I prove it won't work, but you cannot prove it will work.

 

Ignored until there is a good faith attempt to provide credible substantiation for your allegations.

 

Ignore all you want, but it starts out behind the power curve and you cannot prove it will work. After all, it is your idea to prove, not mine to disprove.

 

Wrong AGAIN!

 

Why should I have to disprove something which you created? You are the one who knows everything about it. Not me. I am just an idle bystander who doesn't see how it could possibly work.

 

Ignored until there is a good faith attempt to provide credible substantiation for your allegations.

 

I'll put it more bluntly. You have a hare brained scheme which you refuse to defend. It is your hare brained scheme. Not mine. It is not my job to prove or disprove.

 

If these individuals pose such a risk of harm to the public, that they simply cannot be allowed to possess or have access to firearms under any circumstances, they are obviously too dangerous to be left free to run loose in society where they pose the greatest risk of harm to the public.

It is not that difficult of a concept, and no different than insisting that potentially dangerous animals be kept under control by their owners at all times.

 

Make such an attempt at providing an explanation anyway. Since it is apparently yourself, and only yourself, who truly comprehends the militia act and how it regulated and restricted the private and legal use and ownership of firearms, those that are present could surely benefit from your unrivaled knowledge and expertise on the matter.

 

Why is the states of California and Illinois not mentioned at all in the above citation?

 

Calling people animals now? Crikey.

 

Is the analogy incorrect? Are mentally unbalanced individuals perfectly safe to be around in an unrestrained and unsupervised fashion, and thus there is no reason to deprive them of their legal ability and right to own and possess firearms in whatever manner they choose?

 

So far you've called people animals and suggested concentration camps. No further comment necessary.

 

People are indeed animals, they are simply too stupid to recognize such. In truth people are even worse than animals, because animals do not understand the concept of revenge.

It is no different than sentences of life without the possibility of parole for certain criminal offenses deemed so heinous in nature, that the offender simply cannot be allowed back into society under any circumstances.

The only ones who can object to such are those who do not truly care about protecting the lives of the innocent, and who are only interested in arguing matters of politics over lives.

 

Are all people stupid or is there a great leader that you'd also like to refer too?

 

All people are stupid, just as all people are animals. Such is best realized whenever there is a crisis that results in panic, and the veneer of civilization dissolves in the face of uncertainty.

 

Einstein was stupid then?

 

All people are stupid, just as all people are animals. Humans as a species are obsessed with killing themselves and each other in the largest numbers possible. The entire race conducts itself as if it were genetically hardwired to wipe itself out of existence. Albert Einstein realized this as a fact when the united states became obsessed with the creation of nuclear weapons based on his recommendation, which directly led to the bombing of the cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

 

I'd certainly agree that calling people animals and calling for concentration camps was low down in the cunning stakes.

However, given you ultimately have called yourself stupid (although I think you're being way too harsh; you're just a victim of right wing ideology), there's not a lot more to say! Have a good one.

 

Because nether California at 7.9 nor Illinois at 11.7 evidences an extreme in state firearm fatalities.

Here is the stark contrast at opposite ends of the 50 state spectrum:

State firearm murder rates, 2016, per 100,000 population

Alaska 23.3
Alabama 21.5
Louisiana 21.3
Arkansas 17.8
Kentucky 17.5
Mississippi 19.9

Massachusetts 3.4
Rhode Island 4.1
Hawaii 4.5
New York 4.4
Connecticut 4.6
New Jersey 5.5

​

 

The shooting gallery at "Fancy Pants" LaP's collapsing racket continues:

"Just watch me prove my point!
So.... I"M the 'bad guy with a gun'..."​