New Chicago Handgun Law was approved

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,911
6,790
126
You don't get the masses to be responsible by taking away their responsibilities. You let them keep their inalienable rights, and take them away only when they infringe on the rights of another.

Adults are not children, moonie. You don't punish the whole class because one kid chews his gum loudly.

You are the one who is taking away the will of the masses that live in disaster areas and want gun regulation. You are taking away the rights of adults who want their freedoms curtailed because of the mass presence of irresponsible adults that are actually children. You are the one applying your pablumatic proscription for freedom on people who would kill you before they let you do it. You are a theoretical perfectionist and an asshole, because you can apply your truth where it should apply and not where is shouldn't.

There are two Americas when it comes to guns, the America that relies on them for protection, living far from state authority, and the America whose kids are being killed on the street with guns and want those guns gone. You, are an asshole because you will force chaos and violence on folk who live in anarchy and want and need a police state. These folk watch their children die while you masturbate to the second amendment. Your psychopathology kills.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
This is a case of the government wanting to rule over every aspect of your life. The mayor of Chicago is a nazi.
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
You are the one who is taking away the will of the masses that live in disaster areas and want gun regulation. You are taking away the rights of adults who want their freedoms curtailed because of the mass presence of irresponsible adults that are actually children. You are the one applying your pablumatic proscription for freedom on people who would kill you before they let you do it. You are a theoretical perfectionist and an asshole, because you can apply your truth where it should apply and not where is shouldn't.

There are two Americas when it comes to guns, the America that relies on them for protection, living far from state authority, and the America whose kids are being killed on the street with guns and want those guns gone. You, are an asshole because you will force chaos and violence on folk who live in anarchy and want and need a police state. These folk watch their children die while you masturbate to the second amendment. Your psychopathology kills.


In case you didn't know these people are already armed. Those 52 shootings a few weeks ago didn't happen because guns laws were actually working in Chicago. Then again promoting common fucking sense would be against your political ethos. Instead dipshit liberals like yourself thrive on encouraging stupidity and victimhood behavior to push your flawed agendas at the expense of everyone else in this nation who has a fucking clue.

Hence never addressing the root cause of the issues involved in all this mayhem. Instead blame it on the law abiding for wanting to exercise their right as guaranteed under the 2nd amendment. Then assholes like yourself go on to reward these fucktards by handing out "FREEWELFAREMONIE" for not doing anything with their lives. I got to admit you liberals are great at creating codependent voters and steering them away from ever approaching the mindset of being independent, reflective of oneself and self reliant instead of depending on government and its hand outs. Hell what better way to keep people enslaved then to have them act like total infants and then reward them with more social welfare every time they vote dem.
 
Last edited:

kranky

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
21,020
156
106
You, are an asshole because you will force chaos and violence on folk who live in anarchy and want and need a police state.

OK, that's just scary right there. It presupposes there is no other viable option to solving a crime problem other than a police state, let alone the misguided belief that people actually WANT one. Let's not be so quick to jump on that bandwagon, because if that's the answer then the Land of the Free no longer exists.

I can believe that the politicians of Chicago would be content with a police state, as it would cement their grip on power. I find it ludicrous to suppose that the citizenry wants it. On the other hand, the same citizenry keeps electing the same people, so maybe they really do like things the way they are.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,911
6,790
126
OK, that's just scary right there. It presupposes there is no other viable option to solving a crime problem other than a police state, let alone the misguided belief that people actually WANT one. Let's not be so quick to jump on that bandwagon, because if that's the answer then the Land of the Free no longer exists.

I can believe that the politicians of Chicago would be content with a police state, as it would cement their grip on power. I find it ludicrous to suppose that the citizenry wants it. On the other hand, the same citizenry keeps electing the same people, so maybe they really do like things the way they are.

Now nice of you to argue my point by reaching the same conclusion. Nobody wants a police state. They want effective rule of law and their view of it is to ban weapon possession. They don't need gun protection, they need protection from guns because where they live the people who have them are dangerous and the enemy. They want to practice democracy according to their local conditions.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Now nice of you to argue my point by reaching the same conclusion. Nobody wants a police state. They want effective rule of law and their view of it is to ban weapon possession. They don't need gun protection, they need protection from guns because where they live the people who have them are dangerous and the enemy. They want to practice democracy according to their local conditions.


lol, a gun ban doesnt give them protection from guns. Just the opposite actually.


Silly liberals
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
36,370
10,681
136
Now nice of you to argue my point by reaching the same conclusion. Nobody wants a police state. They want effective rule of law and their view of it is to ban weapon possession. They don't need gun protection, they need protection from guns because where they live the people who have them are dangerous and the enemy. They want to practice democracy according to their local conditions.

How does disarming the good guys help protect them from guns? You seem to forget no law applies to a criminal.

Hell, the argument only makes sense if it's a criminal making it.

They want to practice democracy according to their local conditions.

Then I suggest they secede from a Union that has a 2nd amendment.
 

SoCalAznGuy

Banned
Mar 28, 2010
120
0
0
We could offer cash for guns to get criminals to hand in their guns, and ban the manufacturing iof guns. This should be done ontop of a general ban. This would make it difficult for criminals toreplace their guns. Remember guns have only one purpose, to murder.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
We could offer cash for guns to get criminals to hand in their guns,

This has been proven time and again to NOT work.


and ban the manufacturing iof guns.

Hi. I'm the Constitution, nice to meet you.

This should be done ontop of a general ban. This would make it difficult for criminals toreplace their guns.

lol, thanks for the laugh. Wait, you dont really believe that do you?


Remember guns have only one purpose, to murder.

How do you characterize people using firearms for self-defense when rapists/murderers break into their homes?



Last question, do you have any facts or evidence to back up your claims? Or are you just going off your own personal hunches, despite the overwhelming evidence that refutes what you are saying?
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
You are the one who is taking away the will of the masses that live in disaster areas and want gun regulation. You are taking away the rights of adults who want their freedoms curtailed because of the mass presence of irresponsible adults that are actually children. You are the one applying your pablumatic proscription for freedom on people who would kill you before they let you do it. You are a theoretical perfectionist and an asshole, because you can apply your truth where it should apply and not where is shouldn't.

There are two Americas when it comes to guns, the America that relies on them for protection, living far from state authority, and the America whose kids are being killed on the street with guns and want those guns gone. You, are an asshole because you will force chaos and violence on folk who live in anarchy and want and need a police state. These folk watch their children die while you masturbate to the second amendment. Your psychopathology kills.

Thank goodness there are people like you who actually give a shit what happens to inner-city Chicagoans and willing to make the hard choices like putting in place firearms bans for the people of the city. Who knows how many people would have been killed in Chicago by firearms without those laws, a lot I'm sure.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Thank goodness there are people like you who actually give a shit what happens to inner-city Chicagoans and willing to make the hard choices like putting in place firearms bans for the people of the city. Who knows how many people would have been killed in Chicago by firearms without those laws, a lot I'm sure.

Wait, are you serious or joking? Who follows the firearm ban laws, the criminals or the law abiding citizens?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,504
20,111
146
As opposed to the lack of effort you put in yours.

Wow, you're one to talk. Shall we revisit your disasterous effort to redefine the second amendment in the other gun thread and your complete and total failure?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
We could offer cash for guns to get criminals to hand in their guns, and ban the manufacturing iof guns. This should be done ontop of a general ban. This would make it difficult for criminals toreplace their guns. Remember guns have only one purpose, to murder.

Let's see, a criminal could...

A) Turn in their gun for a $50 gift card to Walmart

B) Stand around the corner from where the gun turn in is, and rob people of their $50 gift cards thus having multiple gift cards and their gun

One of them is more likely. I'll leave it as an exercise for you to determine which it is.

On second thought, you're too stupid to leave this up to chance. The answer is B.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Gun advocates believe that private citizen gun ownership is a deterent to criminal gun crime. Its just not true. FBI and CDC both have numbers going back over 10 years that show clearly a gun owned in the home will 75% of the time will be the cause of injury or death to a loved one or friend before its used against a criminal. Respectfully to the many here who argue the constitutional right they are correct. But there is very little evidence that gun ownership is an effective deterrent.

Sadly I know guys who are not in the least bit afraid because someone else has a gun. The mindset of a serious gun toting criminal is usually not one of fear. I have met and know some seriously messed up in the head gun toting fools and this idea they are somehow going to be afraid, trust me, that ain't the case. Based on constitutional law everyone should be allowed to own a gun. But the the arguments of home protection and criminal deterrent are weak, very weak at best.
 
Last edited:

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
You mean to tell me you wouldn't torture somebody for the location of a nuclear weapon set to go off in a major American city if it was the only way to get the information to prevent it's detonation? Maybe you have principles after all.
I don't know about nick, but in the case of known WMDs, and ONLY in that case, I would waterboard the shit out of anyone who knows their location.

Hell, I'd peel their skin off with a rusty pocketknife, one layer at a time, to get that specific information.

However, I'm against doing so in all other cases...
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
How brain dead can you be? Everything you just said is true. And you, fucktard that you are, want to arm them. How stupid do you have to be to not see the people that live in areas where people are like this, do not want them to have guns. Why? Because they lack accountability and are irresponsible. They are ignorant and uneducated. They are unlawful and don't have jobs or any personal responsibility. And fucking nut cases like you want to arm them. It takes a real Mensa case to throw gasoline on a fire. We should arm the mental patients too, so that nobody breaks in and steels their boogieman from under their beds.
psssst... hey genius, come over here... I have a secret...... the criminals are already armed!!... and, check this crazy shit out... this little factoid might just blow your puny little "enlightened" mind: these same criminals don't care how many laws you pass to restrict them from having guns.

...funny how that works out, eh?
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Let moonie live in his fantasy world. Supreme court said our guns are a civil and fundamental right. Any restictions of that fundamental right will be challenged.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Gun advocates believe that private citizen gun ownership is a deterent to criminal gun crime. Its just not true. FBI and CDC both have numbers going back over 10 years that show clearly a gun owned in the home will 75% of the time will be the cause of injury or death to a loved one or friend before its used against a criminal.

Busted. You are so full of shit its laughable.


Myth: Private ownership of guns is not effective in preventing crime

Fact: Every year, people in the United States use guns to defend themselves against criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times – more than 6,500 people a day, or once every 13
seconds.151 Of these instances, 15.6% of the people using firearms defensively stated that they "almost certainly" saved their lives by doing so.

Fact: In 83.5% (2,087,500) of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either
threatened or used force first, proving that guns are very well suited for self-defense.

Fact: The rate of defensive gun use (SGU) is six times that of criminal gun use.152

Fact: For every accidental death, suicide, or homicide with a firearm, 10 lives are saved
through defensive use.





Myth: You are more likely to be injured or killed using a gun for self-defense

Fact: You are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a
gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%


Myth: Accidental gun fatalities are a serious problem

Fact: Firearm misuse causes only a small number of accidental deaths in the U.S.270 For
example, compared to accidental death from firearms, you are:

• Four times more likely to burn to death or drown
• 17 times more likely to be poisoned
• 19 times more likely to fall
• And 53 times more likely to die in an automobile accident





AND HERE IS WHERE YOUR "FACTS" REALLY GET DEBUNKED


Myth: Handguns are 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a criminal

Fact: Of the 43 deaths reported in this flawed study, 37 (86%) were suicides. Other deaths involved criminal activity between the family members (drug deals gone bad).148

Fact: Of the remaining deaths, the deceased family members include felons, drug dealers, violent spouses committing assault, and other criminals.149


I know that you have been proven to be full of shit, but just in case you are about to make the argument that less guns = less suicide, chew on this:

Myth: Japan has strict gun control and a less violent society

Fact: In Japan, the murder rate is almost 1 per 100,000. In the U.S., there are about 3.2 murders per 100,000 people each year by weapons other than firearms.66 This means that even if firearms in the U.S. could be eliminated, we would still have three times the murder rate of the Japanese. Japan’s murder rate may be low, but its suicide rate is over 20 per 100,000 people. Japanese are being murdered and committing suicide at a rate of about 21 per 100,000. In the U.S., our combined murder and suicide rate is about 21 also.


I know I'm getting ahead of myself, but I'd figure I'd just go ahead and debunk your future argument.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/5.1/gun-facts-5.1-screen.pdf




So basically, you are full of shit


Try again



*edit*

You guys notice how not one of these anti-gun posters ever posts facts? All personal opinion, gut feelings, and hunches that are unsubstantiated by evidence. Its so funny
 
Last edited:

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
So basically, you are full of shit


Try again

I am not going to argue with your silly sources. The FBI and CDC both have produced numbers that show clearly most gun accidents and deaths are not related to criminal activity. I really don't feel like searching the links again, because this has been beat to death. The constitutional right is legitimate but for all these other arguments, the facts don't bare them out.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
I am not going to argue with your silly sources. The FBI and CDC both have produced numbers that show clearly most gun accidents and deaths are not related to criminal activity. I really don't feel like searching the links again, because this has been beat to death. The constitutional right is legitimate but for all these other arguments, the facts don't bare them out.

Hey look, another classy post without facts or evidence. He just dismissed my source!

I bet you were too fucking stupid to click on that link, and see that a great deal of those citations are from law enforcement agencies, many of which are the FBI and the BATFE. You call my source silly, and say your numbers are from the FBI... when infact my facts are from the FBI and BATFE, rofl this is too rich.

lol. Talk about self-ownage.
 
Last edited: