You’re on the exercise bike all the time it seems
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Printable View
You’re on the exercise bike all the time it seems
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
More like hamster wheelQuote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
Well, that's not what I said, but here you go... "rates" at this point simply don't matter. America has just shy of half of the civilian firearms in the world. One for every single person, plus another ~66 million.
If you changed that to "has cancer" the rate would exceed 100 per 100 people.
As of the 2017 small arms survey, the United States had 393,347,000. India was the next highest at 71,101,000.
France: 12,732,000
Canada: 12,708,000
Germany: 15,822,000
The state of Wyoming has well over 140k civilian guns licenses as of 2022. New Jersey, the state with the lowest ownership percentage has over 100k.
If every American had one gun, there'd still be over 66 million left over. And that's just the guns the government knows about.
Attachment 495329
^^^ well now, that couldn't possibly have anything to do with how easy it is for criminals to get guns, does it?
[emoji20]
no, recent stats show the us has more like 60% of the worlds small arms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker
So why don't we have 60% of the world's murders?
Our murder per gun rate is super low
Ussually work out about 6 hours a day. Seems normal to me. Why, you lazy bro?Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
Quote:
Originally Posted by ex-powderbroker
Hey, on a serious note, however you feel about guns, or bump stocks, this involved a law enforcement agency actually trying to rewrite a law to have different wording.
If you don't find that to be an alarming attempt to undermine our legislative process, do you think such behavior would be just fine from other agencies, about other laws?
Congress will probably ban bump stocks and when they do I won't weep over them. Bump stocks are not the point in this instance. Its rewriting a law.
Or am I just absurd and crazy and anything done to make it harder for civilians to legally own guns is inherently good and 100% unproblematic? Im' really hoping you guys don't actually believe the latter.
So Buddy ^^ escaped the padded room and was atempting to mess up the E-bike thread where we had to say nasty things about him but maybe you guys wana keep an eye on him ?
This is an enormously informative answer to my question in the post above yours. No sarcasm. Enormously informative.Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
Also I'm not your buddy, guy.
SCOTUS not necessarily following 5th circuit's partisan lead: domestic abuser/drug dealer with multiple criminal episodes can have his gun access restricted
Thomas dissented of course, but he was the only one
At least we have Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch, Coney Barrett, and Cavanaugh on the record stating that regulatory control of firearms itself isn't unconstitutional...
One wonders what their line-in-the-sand is in light of the 2022 Bruen ruling (where they joined a 6-3 partisan divide trying to cement a "historical reference" guideline precedent into judicial reviews of constitutional issues [written by Thomas of course]).
It's a cafeteria court that picks and chooses their favorite parts of historical precedent.
In a surprise to no one, Leroy fails to understand causation. If a person doesn't understand dynamics and nonlinearities then that person doesn't understand much of anything.
We call everybody Buddy instead of calling them asshole cuz its Canada ehQuote:
Originally Posted by leroy jenkins
probably started with Buddy Wasisname and the Other Fellers,
So no one sees anything at all problematic about law enforcement agencies rewriting laws? This isn't a point where you guys can stop and say hey no thats a bridge too far?
Literally anything is fine as long as its anti gun?
Not even arguing, just checking who I'm dealing with.
bless your heart...
on one hand: I would hope lawmakers & the judiciary could get professional input on public safety from law enforcement agencies.Quote:
Originally Posted by leroy jenkins
on the other: I would also hope the judiciary wouldn't do shit like Heller, Citizens United, Bruen or overturning RvW ("rewriting laws")
Uhh, law enforcement agencies don’t write laws let alone rewrite them. That’s for legislators to do.
Leroy, you ignorant slut. You are dealing with people here who are tethered to reality
Fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by m2711c
I’m thinking that is terra incógnita for the poor guy. I kind of wonder what his daily contacts IRL are.Quote:
Originally Posted by TBS
This isn't an answer. They didn't 'give input' they literally tried to rewrite the wording of the actual law.Quote:
Originally Posted by ::: :::
Yea thats the problem. The ATF tried to literally rewrite the law. Thats the problem. Talk about tethered to reality, this is the reality we are talking about. The one that actually exists. Thanks for the attitude, ussually I'd just toll you, but I'm going to just be mature and attempt to actually discuss this because I'd hope this is something even anti gunners can see is problematic.Quote:
Originally Posted by TBS
you're right. Law enforcement doesn't write or rewrite laws, is the way this country is supposed to work.
This is why the bump stock ban got overturned. Not because some activist judge bla bla bla. Clarence Thomas literally said congress can ban them, and thats fine, and even recommended that they do so. Just not the ATF
And this is where the anti gunners need to be careful or they will forever alienate many moderates and convince them to for all time give up any willingness to compromise on this.
So go ahead guys, make it really clear you dont' care at all about anyone's safety, and just get hard at the idea of government ruling with an iron fist.
Or ya know, demonstrate some ability to actually think about something for yourselves.
How is bless your heart a fact? Did you ever take an English class?Quote:
Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper
Thanks for the concern, I play in a band, volunteer a couple places. Sometimes women even want to cuddle me.
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Regulatory agencies have regulatory powers to make (or modify) rules in consultation with the publicQuote:
Originally Posted by leroy jenkins
The whole “only Congress can make rules” is the dumbest way to a shutdown of government
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by leroy jenkins
Nah, thats a valuable part of the rule of law that separates powers that is fundamental to what has made the American government robust but also able to change. Its essential. If you don't like it you should go somewhere else but this is the law of the land here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ::: :::
At least one of you is right about something. That is, that legislators write laws not law enforcement. You're wrong about the rest, especially the part about me dealing with people who are tethered in reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by TBS
Jesus you guys are fucking nuts. This ridiculously fringe radical authoritarian leftist schtick you guys got going is going to look insane to the vast majority of moderates. If trump had the DOJ actually rewrite a law that affected abortion rights, you guys would be livid. Justifiably so.