Gun control and such.

[Shadowfox]

Virulently anti-police *and* convinced of a global illuminati?

Wow we've just found the first person that makes me wish this board had an ignore function.

Hey now  
I don't believe in a Global Illuminati, I KNOW there is a Global Illuminati.... and that democide (look it up) is the number one un-natural killer of all mankind, and that here in the USA statistically shows in 2015 over 1,000 fatal Cop shootings and over 20% of them were unarmed, non-threatening citizens, if you compare last years numbers with active military in the middle east more US citizens died here at home from our police than our active soldiers from our opponents. Hence, if you look at the numbers the US citizens are being killed AS IF we are occupied by a foreign military. I also beleive the earth is flat and that Free Mason's run the show and that Alex Jones is a Gatekeeper, and that the money system was created and designed by "Sons of God" (Not men, but fallen angles) and my PERSONAL list goes on and on... But I'm not going to sit here an whip up a massive post laying all this out. I have easily over 10,000 hours in all this stuff. I've been a "Conspiracy Theory" person since it was 13 and as I have matured and studied I have gone farther down the path of understanding. AND!!!!! IT'S NOT MY JOB TO FORCE MY BELIEFS ON ANOTHER! .... Rule number 2   lol

P.S. About the Police situation: I try to live at peace with all men, and I personally know a few cops as my wife's friends husbands and most are good guys! But there are a few I'd HATE to get pulled over by, they love the thrill shooting and hunting people they told me as much over dinner.   But I'm not a saber rattler and to be honest, I'd only say this stuff here on TCP or in person! I Tend to stay out of things like this. (So I have no idea why I'm still typing!  )

[KalessinDB]

Virulently anti-police *and* convinced of a global illuminati?

Wow we've just found the first person that makes me wish this board had an ignore function.

Hey now  
I don't believe in a Global Illuminati, I KNOW there is a Global Illuminati.... and that democide (look it up) is the number one un-natural killer of all mankind, and that here in the USA statistically shows in 2015 over 1,000 fatal Cop shootings and over 20% of them were unarmed, non-threatening citizens, if you compare last years numbers with active military in the middle east more US citizens died here at home from our police than our active soldiers from our opponents. Hence, if you look at the numbers the US citizens are being killed AS IF we are occupied by a foreign military. I also beleive the earth is flat and that Free Mason's run the show and that Alex Jones is a Gatekeeper, and that the money system was created and designed by "Sons of God" (Not men, but fallen angles) and my PERSONAL list goes on and on... But I'm not going to sit here an whip up a massive post laying all this out. I have easily over 10,000 hours in all this stuff. I've been a "Conspiracy Theory" person since it was 13 and as I have matured and studied I have gone farther down the path of understanding. AND!!!!! IT'S NOT MY JOB TO FORCE MY BELIEFS ON ANOTHER! .... Rule number 2   lol

P.S. About the Police situation: I try to live at peace with all men, and I personally know a few cops as my wife's friends husbands and most are good guys! But there are a few I'd HATE to get pulled over by, they love the thrill shooting and hunting people they told me as much over dinner.   But I'm not a saber rattler and to be honest, I'd only say this stuff here on TCP or in person! I Tend to stay out of things like this. (So I have no idea why I'm still typing!  )

You? You're being reasonable about it. No name calling. Why is it that being anti-Semitic, homophobic, racist, xenophobic, etc is almost universally reviled by all (excepting, it seems, Trump supporters in the US) but the majority of people are perfectly okay with hating someone they've never met simply because of the job they took? Think police officers, lawyers, used car salesmen, etc.

Yes. There's bad police officers out the. But it's less than 1% of the force, the overwhelming majority of police out there voluntarily work an absolutely thankless job where they literally risk their lives every day, and they're hated the most by the people who want their help the most.

There's bad people in every profession. In every group. I cannot standard people who vilify an entire group because of a fringe minority.

[amiga1200]

i have first hand experience with police, and i'm afraid that:
1, in my own exp, 08/10 TWAT officers kinda shits on the good lower numbers, i don't have the strength, or patience to run the gauntlet taking chances around them. (and i still respect that minority.)
2, THEY chose that line of work, when the poor get their 'justice/revenge' (one of the same, perspective and that) on the cops who have breached their duties beyond reproach, i'll WILL laugh at their cries, using their own families as shields, to stop the blood thiirt of the subjegated.(yet, they are quick to abduct, the cheek)
they chose that line of work, and i'm bear no sympathy for them, and as for the police that are good, they better make themselves known, lest be lumped in.
i'm a human mirror, i just reflect the creature back at them, and the very same weapons they come at me with.
...
if i'm a racist, so be it!
england invented racism anyway. 

[KalessinDB]

I guarantee you I have far, far more experience with a variety of police officers than you do. But, as always, you're entitled to your opinions.

I'm gonna peace out of this thread though, before I get less civil. Take care all.

[amiga1200]

^^ THIN!  
how can you possibly know that?
that's got to be the bullshittiest rebuttal i've seen on the subject.
it's like saying i know you personally, absurd.
i won't deny our experiences differ, but that's all!
and get uncivil, words don't hurt, tonfas and stun guns do!
[edit]
sausage fingers, again. 

[wiggy]

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.

I'm all for civil discourse, but you're only going to hurt your argument if you try to make this up as you go. I already mentioned an 11 year old was stabbed to death next door me by a man claiming to hear voices. I can share a LOT more actual situations where deadly force was necessary, but I don't need to. Common sense dictates that worst case scenarios, however seemingly unlikely, can and DO happen everyday.

I'll share a situation anyways where deadly force would have been justifiable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom

Yes, bad things happen.

Doesn't mean gun ownership would help. That's called speculation.  I could what-if all day long, but it does nothing to prove a point. Nothing.

Personal opinion regarding when it is and isn't appropriate to use deadly force is of no value.

I'm making up reports/data/studies/etc as I go?  I'm sort of confused. I haven't seen a single piece of data that supports the ownership of handguns, just personal opinions and speculation.

It's the same old, same old.  Data is presented which shows handgun ownership is NOT beneficial, and anyone who disagrees tries to poke holes in the data/logic, without providing any evidence to the contrary.  

Let's see some facts.

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.  You are the reason that hand guns should not ever be owned by civilians. Thank god you're across a giant pond.

Also, it's beyond ignorant and presumptuous to assume that, because hand guns are legal here, EVERYONE here is ok with it. Does everyone in the UK like Earl Grey tea and Fish & Chips?

Wake up.

Crossed the line with the fish and chips.  You can keep the earl grey, but I'll take the fish and chips every day of the week. Lol.  We ALL love the f&c.  And if you'd only give it a chance (along with real bacon) you'd love it too.  

Come on, you know what I meant

I think you have selective memory...but just in case, here is a link to the previous discussion...

http://www.thecoverproject.net/forums/index.php?topic=18235.msg163930#msg163930


We were arguing our opinions, you made your points, and I made mine.  (Thanks for the memories, BTW. I had fun scrolling through a bunch of old posts-no sarcasm implied).  This topic, you stated the cartels would be an issue, when there is zero evidence to back that up.  Period.  You can harp on me all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong.   

If they're already freely smuggling across the border, then how is this NOT an issue in the event of a ban, partial or total? This seems like an obvious problem. I'm not sure I understand your argument.

As has already been stated, civilians aren't protecting the general populous from the cartel.

i can't be the only one here you sees no "obvious problem" whatsoever.   

[FritzWhite]

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.

I'm all for civil discourse, but you're only going to hurt your argument if you try to make this up as you go. I already mentioned an 11 year old was stabbed to death next door me by a man claiming to hear voices. I can share a LOT more actual situations where deadly force was necessary, but I don't need to. Common sense dictates that worst case scenarios, however seemingly unlikely, can and DO happen everyday.

I'll share a situation anyways where deadly force would have been justifiable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom

Yes, bad things happen.

Doesn't mean gun ownership would help. That's called speculation.  I could what-if all day long, but it does nothing to prove a point. Nothing.

Personal opinion regarding when it is and isn't appropriate to use deadly force is of no value.

I'm making up reports/data/studies/etc as I go?  I'm sort of confused. I haven't seen a single piece of data that supports the ownership of handguns, just personal opinions and speculation.

It's the same old, same old.  Data is presented which shows handgun ownership is NOT beneficial, and anyone who disagrees tries to poke holes in the data/logic, without providing any evidence to the contrary.  

Let's see some facts.

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.  You are the reason that hand guns should not ever be owned by civilians. Thank god you're across a giant pond.

Also, it's beyond ignorant and presumptuous to assume that, because hand guns are legal here, EVERYONE here is ok with it. Does everyone in the UK like Earl Grey tea and Fish & Chips?

Wake up.

Crossed the line with the fish and chips.  You can keep the earl grey, but I'll take the fish and chips every day of the week. Lol.  We ALL love the f&c.  And if you'd only give it a chance (along with real bacon) you'd love it too.  

Come on, you know what I meant

I think you have selective memory...but just in case, here is a link to the previous discussion...

http://www.thecoverproject.net/forums/index.php?topic=18235.msg163930#msg163930


We were arguing our opinions, you made your points, and I made mine.  (Thanks for the memories, BTW. I had fun scrolling through a bunch of old posts-no sarcasm implied).  This topic, you stated the cartels would be an issue, when there is zero evidence to back that up.  Period.  You can harp on me all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong.  

If they're already freely smuggling across the border, then how is this NOT an issue in the event of a ban, partial or total? This seems like an obvious problem. I'm not sure I understand your argument.

As has already been stated, civilians aren't protecting the general populous from the cartel.

i can't be the only one here you sees no "obvious problem" whatsoever.  

Police and military carry firearms. Is this based on speculation or their personal opinions? Absolutely it is. EVERYTHING is based on speculation. Before I sit down in my chair, I speculate that it will support my weight without breaking. This is speculation backed by common sense. If guns are dangerous to me in the hands of my enemy, they will also be dangerous to my enemy in my hands. You can't argue that guns are too deadly and easy to use but also maintain that they don't have any merit for self defense.

I was never talking about armed citizens fighting the cartel or defending anyone from them. What I was talking about was the fact that you can't completely eliminate guns in the US in the event of a ban because of the cartel's ability to smuggle across our border.

[sheep2001]

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.  You are the reason that hand guns should not ever be owned by civilians. Thank god you're across a giant pond.

Also, it's beyond ignorant and presumptuous to assume that, because hand guns are legal here, EVERYONE here is ok with it. Does everyone in the UK like Earl Grey tea and Fish & Chips?

Wake up.

Crossed the line with the fish and chips.  You can keep the earl grey, but I'll take the fish and chips every day of the week. Lol.  We ALL love the f&c.  And if you'd only give it a chance (along with real bacon) you'd love it too.  

Come on, you know what I meant

I know. I was kidding.  But we do all love it.  Be very suspicious of a Brit who doesn't.  In fact I'm going out to have it on Saturday - it's a special evening that happens once every couple of months.  Proper English fish and chips, served in a little restaurant in southern France.  Can't wait! 🤗

[wiggy]

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.

I'm all for civil discourse, but you're only going to hurt your argument if you try to make this up as you go. I already mentioned an 11 year old was stabbed to death next door me by a man claiming to hear voices. I can share a LOT more actual situations where deadly force was necessary, but I don't need to. Common sense dictates that worst case scenarios, however seemingly unlikely, can and DO happen everyday.

I'll share a situation anyways where deadly force would have been justifiable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom

Yes, bad things happen.

Doesn't mean gun ownership would help. That's called speculation.  I could what-if all day long, but it does nothing to prove a point. Nothing.

Personal opinion regarding when it is and isn't appropriate to use deadly force is of no value.

I'm making up reports/data/studies/etc as I go?  I'm sort of confused. I haven't seen a single piece of data that supports the ownership of handguns, just personal opinions and speculation.

It's the same old, same old.  Data is presented which shows handgun ownership is NOT beneficial, and anyone who disagrees tries to poke holes in the data/logic, without providing any evidence to the contrary.  

Let's see some facts.

If someone breaks into your house, it's to steal whatever you have sitting about, not to kill you. To murder someone in response to such a thing is a sign of mental illness.  You are the reason that hand guns should not ever be owned by civilians. Thank god you're across a giant pond.

Also, it's beyond ignorant and presumptuous to assume that, because hand guns are legal here, EVERYONE here is ok with it. Does everyone in the UK like Earl Grey tea and Fish & Chips?

Wake up.

Crossed the line with the fish and chips.  You can keep the earl grey, but I'll take the fish and chips every day of the week. Lol.  We ALL love the f&c.  And if you'd only give it a chance (along with real bacon) you'd love it too.  

Come on, you know what I meant

I think you have selective memory...but just in case, here is a link to the previous discussion...

http://www.thecoverproject.net/forums/index.php?topic=18235.msg163930#msg163930


We were arguing our opinions, you made your points, and I made mine.  (Thanks for the memories, BTW. I had fun scrolling through a bunch of old posts-no sarcasm implied).  This topic, you stated the cartels would be an issue, when there is zero evidence to back that up.  Period.  You can harp on me all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong.  

If they're already freely smuggling across the border, then how is this NOT an issue in the event of a ban, partial or total? This seems like an obvious problem. I'm not sure I understand your argument.

As has already been stated, civilians aren't protecting the general populous from the cartel.

i can't be the only one here you sees no "obvious problem" whatsoever.  

Police and military carry firearms. Is this based on speculation or their personal opinions? Absolutely it is. EVERYTHING is based on speculation. Before I sit down in my chair, I speculate that it will support my weight without breaking. This is speculation backed by common sense. If guns are dangerous to me in the hands of my enemy, they will also be dangerous to my enemy in my hands. You can't argue that guns are too deadly and easy to use but also maintain that they don't have any merit for self defense.

I was never talking about armed citizens fighting the cartel or defending anyone from them. What I was talking about was the fact that you can't completely eliminate guns in the US in the event of a ban because of the cartel's ability to smuggle across our border.

You're sidestepping (or possibly missing) the point.

Statistics say that handgun ownership is a liability.  this is not an opinion, it is not speculation, it is not biased. It just is. 

the cartel bringing illega firearms into the country has nothing to do with gun safety.  Nothing.

[FritzWhite]

I agree that this stuff about cartels is not really relevant. I feel like we dragged this old argument out already and buried it but I have no problem with reviewing facts. Everything in life is a liability and they are all comparable. People that use swimming pools have a higher risk of drowning. People that drive are more likely to be in a car accident. These are incontrovertible statistics and it's totally ridiculous to say that any of them should be banned as a result.