| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: << 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 >> |
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Message edited 1/11/2013 7:38:18 PM.
|
Posted 1/11/13 7:37 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
Posted by HeathKernandez
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
I agree with you. There is no need for a civillian to own such weapons. When I commented on this thread I was taking into account ALL comments on EVERY recent thread re: gun politics since newtown on this site. Why? because it seemed that the poster was fed up with what she read in all those posts as well as possibly even off of LIF.
I feel like the gun politics debate often starts off as everyone agreed that they are pro-assault weapons ban...but then as the conversations roll along you get the comments like "why does a person need more than 1-2 guns? (no specification towards automatic made) or "guns are instruments of death" or "why would anyone keep a gun in a home where there are children" or "bullets should cost 100,000" (again, no specifications made as to assault vs. any old gun) and THOSE kinds of comments are what I speak towards as well as those made by politicians.
but if we are ONLY taking into account assault weapons...then I completely agree with most of the expressed sentiments on that issue.
I actually agree with everything else colette posted except this: NO one. NO ONE WHO IS INVOLVED in gun control legislation is calling for the removal of firearms from individuals. No ONE.
and maybe the issue is that feinstein is not actually CALLING for it...but she supports it and has said so more than once (without differentiation between assault vs other...more than once). that makes me question her.
maybe NEXT time.. you should READ and try to UNDERSTAND what the poster is trying to say instead of grabbing some little insignificant part of what she said... saying "NOBODY IS SAYING BAN AGAINST GUNS" as in NOBODY IN THE WORLD..
not ONE effing person is saying that.
any INTELLIGENT person would understand that the OP was saying "no one HERE... in the GUN threads of LIF... and the (oh I don't know MAJORITY of people calling for action) is saying ban guns..."
but YOU had to pull out that NOBODY and challenge her with some senator from California... and CHALLENGE the poster's semantics...
YES... you are CORRECT... SOMEBODY is asking for a ALL OUT ban.
yes. you ARE CORRECT.
unfortunately it painted you (YET AGAIN) in a terrible light. AND i do NOT BELIEVE for one second you are "sympathetic" to people who are for stricter gun laws.
you are just someone who wants to sound intelligent and failing miserably at it
AGAIN.
you seem like a very unhappy person. What's missing from your life that you resort to acting like a grade school child? I hope you find your happiness soon.
whatever makes you feel better... I'd rather seem "unhappy" (in your eyes) than have your reasoning or "intelligence...."
and btw- WHAT in my comment resorts me to being a grade school child..
for calling your BS on SEMANTICS? for explaining to you WHY you single-handily CAUSED YOURSELF the drama?
well if that is grade school sh*t dammit- let me know what school district THAT is...
Message edited 1/11/2013 7:42:34 PM.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:40 PM |
| |
|
MandJZ
Time for Baby #2!
Member since 8/10 4194 total posts
Name:
M
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
Posted by HeathKernandez
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
I agree with you. There is no need for a civillian to own such weapons. When I commented on this thread I was taking into account ALL comments on EVERY recent thread re: gun politics since newtown on this site. Why? because it seemed that the poster was fed up with what she read in all those posts as well as possibly even off of LIF.
I feel like the gun politics debate often starts off as everyone agreed that they are pro-assault weapons ban...but then as the conversations roll along you get the comments like "why does a person need more than 1-2 guns? (no specification towards automatic made) or "guns are instruments of death" or "why would anyone keep a gun in a home where there are children" or "bullets should cost 100,000" (again, no specifications made as to assault vs. any old gun) and THOSE kinds of comments are what I speak towards as well as those made by politicians.
but if we are ONLY taking into account assault weapons...then I completely agree with most of the expressed sentiments on that issue.
I actually agree with everything else colette posted except this: NO one. NO ONE WHO IS INVOLVED in gun control legislation is calling for the removal of firearms from individuals. No ONE.
and maybe the issue is that feinstein is not actually CALLING for it...but she supports it and has said so more than once (without differentiation between assault vs other...more than once). that makes me question her.
maybe NEXT time.. you should READ and try to UNDERSTAND what the poster is trying to say instead of grabbing some little insignificant part of what she said... saying "NOBODY IS SAYING BAN AGAINST GUNS" as in NOBODY IN THE WORLD..
not ONE effing person is saying that.
any INTELLIGENT person would understand that the OP was saying "no one HERE... in the GUN threads of LIF... and the (oh I don't know MAJORITY of people calling for action) is saying ban guns..."
but YOU had to pull out that NOBODY and challenge her with some senator from California... and CHALLENGE the poster's semantics...
YES... you are CORRECT... SOMEBODY is asking for a ALL OUT ban.
yes. you ARE CORRECT.
unfortunately it painted you (YET AGAIN) in a terrible light. AND i do NOT BELIEVE for one second you are "sympathetic" to people who are for stricter gun laws.
you are just someone who wants to sound intelligent and failing miserably at it
AGAIN.
you seem like a very unhappy person. What's missing from your life that you resort to acting like a grade school child? I hope you find your happiness soon.
Guns. She's missing guns. That would definitely help her be more happy go lucky and carefree.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:40 PM |
| |
|
Eunyboo
<3
Member since 7/12 4376 total posts
Name:
E
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by EatingMyVeggies
Posted by colette
Thanks to the folks that get it 
Faith restored!!!
It's not about confiscation.
It's about LEGISLATION.
LEGISLATING THE SHIT out of assault weapons, specifically, and their ammo.
I get it. And my post above was about assault weapons/ammo. Not a handgun.
And I agree with you. And if this is the Year of Collette and you're helping people with BBB coupons after Sandy and this new cause regarding newton, I'm all for it.
I'm for and support anyone being touched by something and making a change.
Props, sister friend. I admire anyone with passion for something they believe in!
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:42 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MandJZ
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
Posted by HeathKernandez
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
I agree with you. There is no need for a civillian to own such weapons. When I commented on this thread I was taking into account ALL comments on EVERY recent thread re: gun politics since newtown on this site. Why? because it seemed that the poster was fed up with what she read in all those posts as well as possibly even off of LIF.
I feel like the gun politics debate often starts off as everyone agreed that they are pro-assault weapons ban...but then as the conversations roll along you get the comments like "why does a person need more than 1-2 guns? (no specification towards automatic made) or "guns are instruments of death" or "why would anyone keep a gun in a home where there are children" or "bullets should cost 100,000" (again, no specifications made as to assault vs. any old gun) and THOSE kinds of comments are what I speak towards as well as those made by politicians.
but if we are ONLY taking into account assault weapons...then I completely agree with most of the expressed sentiments on that issue.
I actually agree with everything else colette posted except this: NO one. NO ONE WHO IS INVOLVED in gun control legislation is calling for the removal of firearms from individuals. No ONE.
and maybe the issue is that feinstein is not actually CALLING for it...but she supports it and has said so more than once (without differentiation between assault vs other...more than once). that makes me question her.
maybe NEXT time.. you should READ and try to UNDERSTAND what the poster is trying to say instead of grabbing some little insignificant part of what she said... saying "NOBODY IS SAYING BAN AGAINST GUNS" as in NOBODY IN THE WORLD..
not ONE effing person is saying that.
any INTELLIGENT person would understand that the OP was saying "no one HERE... in the GUN threads of LIF... and the (oh I don't know MAJORITY of people calling for action) is saying ban guns..."
but YOU had to pull out that NOBODY and challenge her with some senator from California... and CHALLENGE the poster's semantics...
YES... you are CORRECT... SOMEBODY is asking for a ALL OUT ban.
yes. you ARE CORRECT.
unfortunately it painted you (YET AGAIN) in a terrible light. AND i do NOT BELIEVE for one second you are "sympathetic" to people who are for stricter gun laws.
you are just someone who wants to sound intelligent and failing miserably at it
AGAIN.
you seem like a very unhappy person. What's missing from your life that you resort to acting like a grade school child? I hope you find your happiness soon.
Guns. She's missing guns. That would definitely help her be more happy go lucky and carefree.
hey wait... let me post some video that I only watched 2 seconds of, memorized that part b/c it validates what I THINK I'm in support of.... and hope that the people of LIF think I actually have a logical thought in my head.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:45 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by EatingMyVeggies
Posted by colette
Thanks to the folks that get it
Faith restored!!!
It's not about confiscation.
It's about LEGISLATION.
LEGISLATING THE SHIT out of assault weapons, specifically, and their ammo.
I get it. And my post above was about assault weapons/ammo. Not a handgun.
And I agree with you. And if this is the Year of Collette and you're helping people with BBB coupons after Sandy and this new cause regarding newton, I'm all for it.
I'm for and support anyone being touched by something and making a change.
Props, sister friend. I admire anyone with passion for something they believe in!
well said...
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:48 PM |
| |
|
hotsauce345
my love, my life, my son
Member since 1/09 4169 total posts
Name:
Melody
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
oh edited your post about feeling sorry for my son and husband? whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? you're a loser...as are others who feel the need to do this and also talk about me here and on other forums as well. Get a life!
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:48 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
oh edited your post about feeling sorry for my son and husband? whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? you're a loser...as are others who feel the need to do this and also talk about me here and on other forums as well. Get a life!
You seem unhappy. =(
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:51 PM |
| |
|
MandJZ
Time for Baby #2!
Member since 8/10 4194 total posts
Name:
M
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Heath I really hope you don't have the balls to back up your mouth. That would be really awkward....
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:51 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? !
I'm smart enough to know when I speak out of passion and what's "appropriate." and not.
something you're clearly lacking.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:52 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MandJZ
Heath I really hope you don't have the balls to back up your mouth. That would be really awkward....
OY! don't know it!!! I made a TON of money on the side-show circuit with THAT
|
| Posted 1/11/13 7:53 PM |
| |
|
Chatham-Chick
*********************
Member since 5/05 10311 total posts
Name:
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
I don't know if these articles/vid have been posted before, but I thought they had interesting viewpoints:
Charles Krauthammer: The roots of mass murder
Ben Stein: Stricter gun laws won't cut shootings
Guns don't kill. Our sons do.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 8:29 PM |
| |
|
Kitten1929
LIF Adult
Member since 1/13 6040 total posts
Name:
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
oh edited your post about feeling sorry for my son and husband? whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? you're a loser...as are others who feel the need to do this and also talk about me here and on other forums as well. Get a life!
You have put yourself out there. The perception that others have of you are simply of your own making. You rant and rant and rant in a nonsensical manner, causing complete and utter chaos on every thread you post on. Your exhausting, long winded responses do nothing but show how utterly incapable you are of having a meaningful discourse with other posters.
I think you need an LIF timeout. You should come back when you can play well with others.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 8:38 PM |
| |
|
hotsauce345
my love, my life, my son
Member since 1/09 4169 total posts
Name:
Melody
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by Kitten1929
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
oh edited your post about feeling sorry for my son and husband? whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? you're a loser...as are others who feel the need to do this and also talk about me here and on other forums as well. Get a life!
You have put yourself out there. The perception that others have of you are simply of your own making. You rant and rant and rant in a nonsensical manner, causing complete and utter chaos on every thread you post on. Your exhausting, long winded responses do nothing but show how utterly incapable you are of having a meaningful discourse with other posters.
I think you need an LIF timeout. You should come back when you can play well with others.
and so bringing my husband and son into it is warranted? what pigs!! you wanna know whats wrong with the world? it's not guns...it's people like you and the rest who think bashing people in seperate forums is ok...and talking about their families. ANIMALS!
|
| Posted 1/11/13 8:41 PM |
| |
|
rsquared
Sweet P is here!
Member since 4/11 2026 total posts
Name:
R
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Who needs Pay-Per-View?
|
| Posted 1/11/13 8:44 PM |
| |
|
BriBri2u
L'amore vince sempre
Member since 5/05 9320 total posts
Name:
Mrs. B
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Oh GOD  Oh dear GOD
I just will NEVER understand or accept any persons reasoning to not ban assault weapons!
|
| Posted 1/11/13 8:51 PM |
| |
|
Kitten1929
LIF Adult
Member since 1/13 6040 total posts
Name:
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
Posted by Kitten1929
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
oh edited your post about feeling sorry for my son and husband? whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? you're a loser...as are others who feel the need to do this and also talk about me here and on other forums as well. Get a life!
You have put yourself out there. The perception that others have of you are simply of your own making. You rant and rant and rant in a nonsensical manner, causing complete and utter chaos on every thread you post on. Your exhausting, long winded responses do nothing but show how utterly incapable you are of having a meaningful discourse with other posters.
I think you need an LIF timeout. You should come back when you can play well with others.
and so bringing my husband and son into it is warranted? what pigs!! you wanna know whats wrong with the world? it's not guns...it's people like you and the rest who think bashing people in seperate forums is ok...and talking about their families. ANIMALS!
I never said anything about your family. I know nothing about separate forums and know you only from LIF. What I posted is simply in response to what I've seen of you here.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:03 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
Posted by Kitten1929
Posted by MrsMeloyellow
oh edited your post about feeling sorry for my son and husband? whats the matter don't have the balls to back up your mouth? you're a loser...as are others who feel the need to do this and also talk about me here and on other forums as well. Get a life!
You have put yourself out there. The perception that others have of you are simply of your own making. You rant and rant and rant in a nonsensical manner, causing complete and utter chaos on every thread you post on. Your exhausting, long winded responses do nothing but show how utterly incapable you are of having a meaningful discourse with other posters.
I think you need an LIF timeout. You should come back when you can play well with others.
and so bringing my husband and son into it is warranted? what pigs!! you wanna know whats wrong with the world? it's not guns...it's people like you and the rest who think bashing people in seperate forums is ok...and talking about their families. ANIMALS!
ok.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:03 PM |
| |
|
Kitten1929
LIF Adult
Member since 1/13 6040 total posts
Name:
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by BriBri2u
Oh GOD Oh dear GOD
I just will NEVER understand or accept any persons reasoning to not ban assault weapons!
I agree. If someone wants to own a small handgun or whatehaveyou, I'm okay with that. Military spec assault rifles should not be owned by civilians.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:05 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
aaaaand cue the part where MY turns it around on "others" making it too "personal..."
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:06 PM |
| |
|
2BadSoSad
LIF Adult
Member since 8/12 6791 total posts
Name:
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
I honestly DO NOT understand they will get their hands on weapons. I DO NOT believe that all these young kids who DID NOT HAVE READY access to assault weapons would go searching for them on the black market. I DO believe some of them would give up OR get their hands on weapons that are more readily accessible like a handgun or hunting rifle WHICH DO NOT have the ability to take out an entire classroom of babies in a matter of seconds. I FIRMLY believe these young kids, who are NOT seasoned criminals will take the path of least resistance. And if they get their hands on a rifle or handgun....will some people be injured, maybe, will some people die, maybe, BUT THEY WILL NOT be able to take out 20 people in two minutes. People looking down the barrel will have a fighting chance.....these children deserved a fighting chance. So to do NOTHING, throw your hands up, SOLVES NOTHING, it strips more future innocent victims of A CHANCE. GOD< WHAT IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE??? WHY would you strip more innocent babies of their chance to live, just so you don't have your assault weapons stripped from you? HUMAN LIFE TRUMPS HOBBIES....every.single.time.
If it STOPS 5 people, if it makes them give up and it stops 5 more Newtons, or Auroras, thats 100 lives. To me, its worth it.
Message edited 1/11/2013 9:35:28 PM.
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:20 PM |
| |
|
HeathKernandez
Our Ron is an awesome Ron
Member since 4/07 9091 total posts
Name:
baby fish mouth
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
hmmmm I have a premonition that we are going to have a new poster that will suddenly get *controversial* with insignificant links and *sources...*
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:25 PM |
| |
|
Cheeks24
Living a dream
Member since 1/08 8589 total posts
Name:
Cheeks
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Posted by HeathKernandez
aaaaand cue the part where MY turns it around on "others" making it too "personal..."
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:29 PM |
| |
|
Summergrl73
LIF Adolescent
Member since 5/07 510 total posts
Name:
Excited
|
Re: The argument is not "GUNS" vs. "NO GUNS"
Don't you realize he was out to kill??????? He wanted to kill people!!!!!!!!! If gun control laws tighten up, that guy would not have said hmmmm it is against the law now to go buy this gun so I am not going to use it. He would have bought it anyway from a black market gun dealer. I am not saying that the current laws should not be looked over, all I am saying is by making them stricter you are not stopping some psycho path who wants to kill from killing.
ETA: And I know he didn't buy the gun, it was in the house I am just saying a killer will kill
I hope you realize that most guns used in these crimes were bought legally at some point. If they are made illegal they will be harder to get for EVERYONE. We need stricter laws and more prosecution for those who break the laws. If assault rifles become illegal there will be less of them out there for the bad guys to get.
I also don't get your argument about sex trafficking and drugs- are you saying they should be legal just because they are hard to stop? I dont want to live in that world... I would rather be a problem solver than a person who just gives up...At least for the sake of my children...and yours...
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:32 PM |
| |
|
|
|
The argument is not
Legit question: if the assault weapons were to ever be banned, what happens if you currently own one?
I'm too tired to Google through any more gun stuff tonight. Anyone know off-hand?
|
| Posted 1/11/13 9:34 PM |
| |
|
| Pages: << 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 >> |
