100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: We need to ban cars! This is tragic! | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 12/19/12 06:28 PM
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just imagine the carnage if someone purposely drove one into a playground at a kindergarten and said it was an accident.
Those things in the wrong hands will kill and maim. The Gubament needs to do psychological evaluations on all who are driving and all who will be driving. If they find some who, in their future, could possibly be a danger, they can flag him/her from getting a permit to operate a vehicle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How many more people would die if we didn't have ambulances to rush them to hospitals? Or trucks to get medical equipment and supplies to where they're needed? How many peoples' livelihoods would be ruined by the impending job losses from cars no longer being produced and maintained? How many people would get sick/hurt by more rigorous forms of travel? That's terrible that a person died and many were hurt but what you're suggesting would cause far more problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If vehicles were given only to people who were deemed, by the Gubament, to be sane and rational, yes, we would all be much safer.
There would be no threat to the children if some loon decided to veer off into a crowd of them at play or on the sidewalk. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How would we have become America, fed ourselves, defended ourselves or maintained our limited freedom without guns? Kind of shines a little light on the lib agenda of disarming American citizens defenses doesn't it. Both are tools with a history, neither is "safe" in the wrong hands, but they will never ban cars...... or alcohol! A deadly combination! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How many more people would die if we didn't have ambulances to rush them to hospitals? Or trucks to get medical equipment and supplies to where they're needed? How many peoples' livelihoods would be ruined by the impending job losses from cars no longer being produced and maintained? How many people would get sick/hurt by more rigorous forms of travel? That's terrible that a person died and many were hurt but what you're suggesting would cause far more problems. The post is sarcasm to the anti-gun freaks jumping on the Newtown tragedy to promote an agenda. Welcome to Mingle, the land of rhetoric repetition and sarcasm 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I actually had some azzhole get frosty with me on the freeway and I swear to god had he had brandished a weapon I was going to drive his azz right into the center divider, drag him from his wrecked car and disarm him with extremer prejudice.
I want to know what the hell is going on. Are people getting stupid or are they just getting stupider? Is there really a mind control satellite in orbit?  Is Obama flipping the switch to stupid followed by violent? Then watching the news for laughs? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 12/19/12 07:09 PM
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks or has an attitude problem, and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a psychosis and a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! Remind me again how many DC denisons have been "suspected" for DUI? (They're above the laws they enact so it's always a medical condition that requires rehab) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 12/19/12 07:06 PM
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! never? no that is an other extreme that blurs the conversation no law has ever eliminated any action,,,,thats not its intent but when comparing vehicles, please do compare mass killings with mass killings accidents with accidents and homicides with homicides instead of comparing vehicle deaths, which are mostly accidental while people are using their vehicle for its MANUFACTURED and harmless purpose with gun homicides, which are INTENTIONAL by people using the gun as it was intended and manufactured to be used,,, and the mode of transportation one uses has nothing to do with homicide,,shoes were made to walk in, but the shoe someone wears when they stalk and kill someone has nothing to do with it being a homicide or with that person being dead,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 12/19/12 07:51 PM
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! never? no that is an other extreme that blurs the conversation no law has ever eliminated any action,,,,thats not its intent but when comparing vehicles, please do compare mass killings with mass killings accidents with accidents and homicides with homicides instead of comparing vehicle deaths, which are mostly accidental while people are using their vehicle for its MANUFACTURED and harmless purpose with gun homicides, which are INTENTIONAL by people using the gun as it was intended and manufactured to be used,,, and the mode of transportation one uses has nothing to do with homicide,,shoes were made to walk in, but the shoe someone wears when they stalk and kill someone has nothing to do with it being a homicide or with that person being dead,,, Texting, talking on your phone, putting on makeup, not being mindful of other drivers, or drinking when driving and causing an "accident" should be criminal intent as much as any object that can be used to exact harm on another. Guns weren't made to kill people although they are quite capable of that, but to protect/defend the user or provide food. Only a lib would think otherwise. The military/criminal mind made it a weapon...like the Clinton/Bush/Obozo CIA/military did with spydrone technology! (which you stated you approve of... for the greater good of course) 8,000 gun related deaths a year (the largest percentages going to police and gang related crime), over 2,000 by fist or feet....maybe we should outlaw shoes too! Vehicular deaths number over 38,000 a year....which seems to be more of a problem? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! never? no that is an other extreme that blurs the conversation no law has ever eliminated any action,,,,thats not its intent but when comparing vehicles, please do compare mass killings with mass killings accidents with accidents and homicides with homicides instead of comparing vehicle deaths, which are mostly accidental while people are using their vehicle for its MANUFACTURED and harmless purpose with gun homicides, which are INTENTIONAL by people using the gun as it was intended and manufactured to be used,,, and the mode of transportation one uses has nothing to do with homicide,,shoes were made to walk in, but the shoe someone wears when they stalk and kill someone has nothing to do with it being a homicide or with that person being dead,,, Texting, talking on your phone, putting on makeup, not being mindful of other drivers, or drinking when driving and causing an "accident" should be criminal intent as much as any object that can be used to exact harm on another. Many of the activities you mentioned are illegal in a number of areas. Whether someone says that all guns should be outlawed or all guns should be legal, they're probably wrong. Just like any issue, if you suggest that one extreme or the other is the 'right' or 'only' way then you're probably not a rational person. It seems that most people without an agenda feel that there isn't a need for certain types of firearms. No member of the general public really needs an automatic weapon. I'm not sure if they're legal to hunt with and, even if they are, that doesn't mean you can't use a far less dangerous weapon. 'Gun Control' does not mean the elimination of guns. Furthermore, you keep bringing up other activities seemingly to suggest that, because they're legal, that all guns should be as well. There are a great many restrictions on the production, sale and consumption of alcohol. Just as there should be for any product available to consumers. Especially those that are potentially harmful. Also, you talk about how this country was built with the aid of guns. It was also built with the aid of slavery and horrendous treatment of the Native Americans. Just because those things played a role doesn't mean they should be celebrated or available without proper oversight. Anyways, enjoy Fox News and have fun twisting this into whatever way best fits your argument. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! never? no that is an other extreme that blurs the conversation no law has ever eliminated any action,,,,thats not its intent but when comparing vehicles, please do compare mass killings with mass killings accidents with accidents and homicides with homicides instead of comparing vehicle deaths, which are mostly accidental while people are using their vehicle for its MANUFACTURED and harmless purpose with gun homicides, which are INTENTIONAL by people using the gun as it was intended and manufactured to be used,,, and the mode of transportation one uses has nothing to do with homicide,,shoes were made to walk in, but the shoe someone wears when they stalk and kill someone has nothing to do with it being a homicide or with that person being dead,,, Texting, talking on your phone, putting on makeup, not being mindful of other drivers, or drinking when driving and causing an "accident" should be criminal intent as much as any object that can be used to exact harm on another. Many of the activities you mentioned are illegal in a number of areas. Whether someone says that all guns should be outlawed or all guns should be legal, they're probably wrong. Just like any issue, if you suggest that one extreme or the other is the 'right' or 'only' way then you're probably not a rational person. It seems that most people without an agenda feel that there isn't a need for certain types of firearms. No member of the general public really needs an automatic weapon. I'm not sure if they're legal to hunt with and, even if they are, that doesn't mean you can't use a far less dangerous weapon. 'Gun Control' does not mean the elimination of guns. Furthermore, you keep bringing up other activities seemingly to suggest that, because they're legal, that all guns should be as well. There are a great many restrictions on the production, sale and consumption of alcohol. Just as there should be for any product available to consumers. Especially those that are potentially harmful. Also, you talk about how this country was built with the aid of guns. It was also built with the aid of slavery and horrendous treatment of the Native Americans. Just because those things played a role doesn't mean they should be celebrated or available without proper oversight. Anyways, enjoy Fox News and have fun twisting this into whatever way best fits your argument. Up until this point, Fox News hadn't even been mentioned in this thread. It appears to me that someone has Fox Derangement Syndrome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FEAR OUTRAGE XENOPHOBIA news network likes? Hmmm, CNN doesn't fact bend? Ted Turner Network isn't evil mind bending media that is an opiate for the sheeple?
Here is a good one, MSNBC doesn't twist the truth... Almost all media sources twist the truth so hard the truth has bleeding nipples! THAT IS TEXAS STYLE TRUTH TWISTING! But some media companies give the truth a Nurple... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 12/20/12 10:35 PM
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! never? no that is an other extreme that blurs the conversation no law has ever eliminated any action,,,,thats not its intent but when comparing vehicles, please do compare mass killings with mass killings accidents with accidents and homicides with homicides instead of comparing vehicle deaths, which are mostly accidental while people are using their vehicle for its MANUFACTURED and harmless purpose with gun homicides, which are INTENTIONAL by people using the gun as it was intended and manufactured to be used,,, and the mode of transportation one uses has nothing to do with homicide,,shoes were made to walk in, but the shoe someone wears when they stalk and kill someone has nothing to do with it being a homicide or with that person being dead,,, Texting, talking on your phone, putting on makeup, not being mindful of other drivers, or drinking when driving and causing an "accident" should be criminal intent as much as any object that can be used to exact harm on another. Many of the activities you mentioned are illegal in a number of areas. Whether someone says that all guns should be outlawed or all guns should be legal, they're probably wrong. Just like any issue, if you suggest that one extreme or the other is the 'right' or 'only' way then you're probably not a rational person. It seems that most people without an agenda feel that there isn't a need for certain types of firearms. No member of the general public really needs an automatic weapon. I'm not sure if they're legal to hunt with and, even if they are, that doesn't mean you can't use a far less dangerous weapon. 'Gun Control' does not mean the elimination of guns. Furthermore, you keep bringing up other activities seemingly to suggest that, because they're legal, that all guns should be as well. There are a great many restrictions on the production, sale and consumption of alcohol. Just as there should be for any product available to consumers. Especially those that are potentially harmful. Also, you talk about how this country was built with the aid of guns. It was also built with the aid of slavery and horrendous treatment of the Native Americans. Just because those things played a role doesn't mean they should be celebrated or available without proper oversight. Anyways, enjoy Fox News and have fun twisting this into whatever way best fits your argument. Faux Noise You go there to see what's happening and laugh at their spin, then elsewhere for the truth to the story. The 2nd amendment was put in place to defend the citizens right to bear arms should the need ever come to oppose gov't tyranny! In that context, every citizen has the right to own and bear any weapon the gov't or its forces may have. They do work for us you know, not the other way around as they would have you to believe! Our rights are more constitutionally protected than their limited ones! They are doing their best to change that balance, remove our rights and restrict our liberties....DAILY! Killing women and children, bombing nations we are not at war with, even killing and indefinately detaining US citizens without representation or trial.... NOT the acts of a very responsible person or persons! But they have these weapons! They also supply them to Mexican drug cartels, terrorists, and foreign dictators (who we later end up facing our own weapons to oust when they quit going along with them) but we can't own them? They take away our rights to possess these weapons and what is to keep them from targeting us next (which is already in place with drones and cameras watching our every move, body scanners, RFID tags in all we buy or possess, trackers in our phones, cars, and ID/bank cards, warrantless searches and arrest!) Watch the movies "1984", "THX 1138", "Minority Report" and any number of others....we're there! It's not about hunting or sport, though either are as good a reason as another, but about defending ourselves from tyranny and oppression! Under the Patriot Act they have declared the US a battlefield....how many foreign troops have you seen on our soil (that they haven't invited)? Why are they using those troops and our civilians and cities to train them in "crowd control"? Why does FEMA need billions of rounds of hollow point ammo? They can't even get food, water, shelter or gasoline to troubled areas after a disaster! We are at war, but our enemy is not who they would have us believe it is! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, give it time and we won't be driving our cars, we'll be programming them.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/14/3766218/self-driving-cars-google-volvo-law Introducing the 'Googlemobile'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If people weren't allowed to buy these death machines things like this wouldn't happen! http://news.yahoo.com/1-dead-least-30-hurt-ny-traffic-pileup-230650492.html there is a difference between 'accidents' and homicide,,, apples and oranges And there has never been a vehicular homicide? Seems there are many cases where people have used their cars as weapons, drove them into crowds. Seems Tim McVey used a truck in his bombing escapade, and cartels use machine guns mounted on cars. Maybe Obozo will marry your apples and oranges together or exec order a new mandate allowing for them to join. You wanna blame guns that have no mind of their own, but not cars that are used for the same purpose. That's lib thinking for ya! Anyone who drinks and gets behind the wheel of a car is no better than any kid with a semi-auto. There's your apples and oranges....in a nice pulpy mash! never? no that is an other extreme that blurs the conversation no law has ever eliminated any action,,,,thats not its intent but when comparing vehicles, please do compare mass killings with mass killings accidents with accidents and homicides with homicides instead of comparing vehicle deaths, which are mostly accidental while people are using their vehicle for its MANUFACTURED and harmless purpose with gun homicides, which are INTENTIONAL by people using the gun as it was intended and manufactured to be used,,, and the mode of transportation one uses has nothing to do with homicide,,shoes were made to walk in, but the shoe someone wears when they stalk and kill someone has nothing to do with it being a homicide or with that person being dead,,, Texting, talking on your phone, putting on makeup, not being mindful of other drivers, or drinking when driving and causing an "accident" should be criminal intent as much as any object that can be used to exact harm on another. Many of the activities you mentioned are illegal in a number of areas. Whether someone says that all guns should be outlawed or all guns should be legal, they're probably wrong. Just like any issue, if you suggest that one extreme or the other is the 'right' or 'only' way then you're probably not a rational person. It seems that most people without an agenda feel that there isn't a need for certain types of firearms. No member of the general public really needs an automatic weapon. I'm not sure if they're legal to hunt with and, even if they are, that doesn't mean you can't use a far less dangerous weapon. 'Gun Control' does not mean the elimination of guns. Furthermore, you keep bringing up other activities seemingly to suggest that, because they're legal, that all guns should be as well. There are a great many restrictions on the production, sale and consumption of alcohol. Just as there should be for any product available to consumers. Especially those that are potentially harmful. Also, you talk about how this country was built with the aid of guns. It was also built with the aid of slavery and horrendous treatment of the Native Americans. Just because those things played a role doesn't mean they should be celebrated or available without proper oversight. Anyways, enjoy Fox News and have fun twisting this into whatever way best fits your argument. Faux Noise You go there to see what's happening and laugh at their spin, then elsewhere for the truth to the story. The 2nd amendment was put in place to defend the citizens right to bear arms should the need ever come to oppose gov't tyranny! In that context, every citizen has the right to own and bear any weapon the gov't or its forces may have. They do work for us you know, not the other way around as they would have you to believe! Our rights are more constitutionally protected than their limited ones! They are doing their best to change that balance, remove our rights and restrict our liberties....DAILY! Killing women and children, bombing nations we are not at war with, even killing and indefinately detaining US citizens without representation or trial.... NOT the acts of a very responsible person or persons! But they have these weapons! They also supply them to Mexican drug cartels, terrorists, and foreign dictators (who we later end up facing our own weapons to oust when they quit going along with them) but we can't own them? They take away our rights to possess these weapons and what is to keep them from targeting us next (which is already in place with drones and cameras watching our every move, body scanners, RFID tags in all we buy or possess, trackers in our phones, cars, and ID/bank cards, warrantless searches and arrest!) Watch the movies "1984", "THX 1138", "Minority Report" and any number of others....we're there! It's not about hunting or sport, though either are as good a reason as another, but about defending ourselves from tyranny and oppression! Under the Patriot Act they have declared the US a battlefield....how many foreign troops have you seen on our soil (that they haven't invited)? Why are they using those troops and our civilians and cities to train them in "crowd control"? Why does FEMA need billions of rounds of hollow point ammo? They can't even get food, water, shelter or gasoline to troubled areas after a disaster! We are at war, but our enemy is not who they would have us believe it is! Do you have actual facts to back up any of your claims? Putting an exclamation point behind someone or using a Tom Cruise movie as an example doesn't make something a fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have actual facts to back up any of your claims? Which claims are you interested in?…I might have some facts about them if you're interested. On the subject of cars, I used to have one when I was kinda young and foolish, and truth to tell, I kinda miss the drag racing & drunk driving, but when I had kids of my own, I finally had to smarten up. To prevent them from accidentally getting killed by a car, I got rid of it. Problem is, there are cars all over the place and all sorts of nutballs driving them, so I've been lobbying to have cars banned for everyone except the police and the military (who need them to do their jobs). What I can't understand is why it seems so easy to get guns banned, but not cars. It is easier for a nutball driver to take out 10 or 20 people at a packed bus stop than it is for a deranged killer to take out an equivalent number in a school or mall with a semi-auto, so why all the fuss about guns when we have millions of cars running around? Sounds kinda hypocritical to me. I think we should ban BOTH guns AND cars…and baseball bats and cutlery and big rocks and SSRIs and firecrackers (a good source of powder for pipe bombs) and smoke detectors (a good source of radioactive material for dirty bombs) and glass & glass bottles (makes a great impromptu knife) and airplanes (would have saved the twin towers and a lot of other lives to boot) and trains carrying flammable stuff thru populated areas and LNG tankers and levy's (you know they're gonna break and probably kill people) and ice picks and scratch awls and chisels and screwdrivers. This is only a partial listing of weaponry that is or can be used to kill people, so I think its only fair to ban it all, don't you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
its not easy nor is it likely guns will be 'banned'
it is more likely and easier for them to require licensing that is regulated,,, just like cars,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
its not easy nor is it likely guns will be 'banned' it is more likely and easier for them to require licensing that is regulated,,, just like cars,,, And that will keep guns out ofthe hands of criminals how? |
|
|
|
|
