Member of the Month

JalmarKalmar
April, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Dianne feinstein/anti gun activists.

profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,349
why does it seem like they are so clueless about firearms or really aything in general?
pic related.


-finger on trigger
-magazine is in
-gun not pointed in safe direction
-wants to ban guns and doesnt know shit about them.



anyways article i stumbled across:


"We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than three rounds. And yet it's legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines."
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) made this comment during a March 7 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun control, claiming her proposed semi-automatic weapons ban would finally make it illegal to hunt people.

Since the bill didn't make it out of committee and was subsequently muzzled by the Senate, in Feinstein's world, it remains legal to hunt humans with "150-round magazines."

Such hysterical hyperbole is nothing new for Feinstein, who in 1994 said the Clinton-Era Assault Weapons Ban she authored didn't go far enough in restricting firearms.

"If I could have banned them all -- 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' -- I would have!" she said in a quote that endures as a rallying cry for the growing legion of "Mr. and Mrs. Americas" who fear Feinstein's ultimate aim is to criminalize private ownership of firearms.

Opinions?
POLL
Edit Poll
Votes:

Take care when editing a poll; Options should be similar to maintain vote integrity.

More options will be added automatically as you type. You must supply a question and at least two options. No HTML is allowed.

Sep 16 2014 11:53AM
143 34
profile picture
.Hugo.
Posts: 17360 - Karma: 28,474
Becayse most people against guns have never held a firearm let alone used one
Sep 16 2014 11:56AM
3 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,349
pic in OP didnt work, here it is

Sep 16 2014 11:56AM
4 0
profile picture
Bombogenesis
Posts: 1984 - Karma: 4,006
I personally enjoy the billboard on the mass pike that says "we need a federal assault weapons ban" or whatever. It has a counter of gun deaths since sandy hook and it's at like 30000 or something but 99.9% of those are from handguns 😂
Sep 16 2014 12:09PM
0 0
profile picture
howlongcanausern
Posts: 4982 - Karma: 1,737
if the government asked me to turn in my guns, i would.
Sep 16 2014 12:21PM
0 8
profile picture
iFlip
Posts: 4541 - Karma: 19,089
wepresidentnowif the government asked me to turn in my guns, i would.


What's it like being a sheep? Do you listen to all shepherds or just the government-shepherd? All your baa-ing is getting annoying. Perhaps it's time for mutton?
Sep 16 2014 12:22PM
4 3
profile picture
987321654hgfd
Posts: 5133 - Karma: 5,447
This one is my favorite

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0
Sep 16 2014 12:31PM
4 0
profile picture
PASKIINGSUCKS
Posts: 9097 - Karma: 777
Well as far as the government knows I have no guns ha.

That quote in OP is too stupid to be real. How is this woman an elected official??? Oh right....California.
Sep 16 2014 12:36PM
1 0
profile picture
JAHpow
Posts: 7282 - Karma: 17,169
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Sep 16 2014 1:03PM
3 0
profile picture
deleted5
Posts: 14507 - Karma: 13,500
Let's give everyone a gun then no one will need a gun, gun crisis solved. Bojack horseman ftw.
Sep 16 2014 1:07PM
3 2
profile picture
AT-AT
Posts: 3281 - Karma: 3,256
This can't be real. If I was in that room with her holding the gun like that, i would have took cover, and then yelled at her. (Just as i was yelled at the first time I held a gun incorrectly)

They speak as if they are experts and in reality know nothing.
Sep 16 2014 1:21PM
1 1
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
Consider this...

Feinstein can in a sense, owe her current position to gun violence.

in 1978, The mayor of SF and supervisor Harvey Milk (who was an instrumental gay rights activist) were murdered by one of the former city supervisors, Dan White - who was effectively pissed that Moscone didn't reappoint him as a supervisor, and that Milk had lobbied against his re-appointment. (He also planned to kill future SF mayor Willie Brown, and former freedom rider Carol Ruth Silver)

(Dan White basically got away with murder, and only served like 5 years in prison thanks to his "twinkie defense" (literally said he was depressed and suffered diminished capacity because he changed his diet to twinkies and unhealthy foods) He committed suicide after his parole.)

--

After this, Feinstein rose to prominence, became Mayor of SF and then California state senator. It's possible that without it, others may have rose through the ranks in her place - namely those such as Harvey Milk, or Mayor Mascone, both of whom were quite well regarded.




as for Feinstein, and someone who has voted for her before - the main reason she keeps getting elected is because A: Democrat (and lets face it, Californians would vote for mickey Mouse if he had a D next to his name, these days) and B: no serious challenger has even had a chance because they're either really lame republicans, or Democrats looking to raise their profile just by having gone up against Feinstein... She's not the progressive bill pusher she used to be in the 80's/90's... Now she's kinda just talking out of her ass like many other older congress members who probably have diminished capacity themselves just due to too much time in the beltway...


She did not receive my vote last time around (Neither did her challenger). I am a strong advocate for term limits in congress simply because of old fogeys like feinstein. Congress sucks because it's just the old guard, and anyone new just gets sucked into it as they try to appeal for support of their own bills to the powerful. There should be no more than 3 terms for a senator, and 5 terms for a House Rep, IMO. Nobody should hold office for much more than a decade...
Sep 16 2014 1:34PM
6 0
profile picture
t_rob
Posts: 6433 - Karma: 11,458
This chart compares the ranks of percentage of people who admitted to gun ownership from 2007 census data to 2010 fbi murder rate data for the 50 states and DC.

It was the data available, obviously using the same or multiple years of data would be better and there are better potential metrics about guns than the people admitting to owning them but the data doesn't lie.

I looked at comparing the ownership percentages to murder rates as X,Y but it just recreates the purple graph more or less. I think seeing states and both ranks at the same time tells a better story.

So in DC, the 3.6% of the population own guns but 16.5 per 100k die from gun murders.

In Hawaii, 6.7% of the population own guns but only 0.5 per 100k die from guns.

In Wyoming, 59.7% of people admit to owning guns but 0.9 per 100k die from them.





Tell me, do more guns stop gun murders or do more guns create gun murders? The inverse as well. Or does this data set tell you absolutely nothing about how guns relate to gun murders?


My takeaway: it's not where the guns are, it's who has the guns so everyone should just stop trying to prove something they can't. Also stay the fuck away from DC.
Sep 16 2014 3:12PM
5 0
profile picture
LiquorLanch
Posts: 1909 - Karma: 1,046
BombogenesisI personally enjoy the billboard on the mass pike that says "we need a federal assault weapons ban" or whatever. It has a counter of gun deaths since sandy hook and it's at like 30000 or something but 99.9% of those are from handguns 😂


by fenway? werent they ordered to remove that or something due to how misleading it was?
Sep 16 2014 3:15PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
t_robThis chart compares the ranks of percentage of people who admitted to gun ownership from 2007 census data to 2010 fbi murder rate data for the 50 states and DC.

It was the data available, obviously using the same or multiple years of data would be better and there are better potential metrics about guns than the people admitting to owning them but the data doesn't lie.

I looked at comparing the ownership percentages to murder rates as X,Y but it just recreates the purple graph more or less. I think seeing states and both ranks at the same time tells a better story.

So in DC, the 3.6% of the population own guns but 16.5 per 100k die from gun murders.

In Hawaii, 6.7% of the population own guns but only 0.5 per 100k die from guns.

In Wyoming, 59.7% of people admit to owning guns but 0.9 per 100k die from them.





Tell me, do more guns stop gun murders or do more guns create gun murders? The inverse as well. Or does this data set tell you absolutely nothing about how guns relate to gun murders?


My takeaway: it's not where the guns are, it's who has the guns so everyone should just stop trying to prove something they can't. Also stay the fuck away from DC.


Absolutely moot point. Note the population density of those three places.

In Wyoming, how the fuck are you going to murder someone.. You can't find your neighbor to begin with...
Sep 16 2014 3:16PM
5 0
profile picture
*DUMBCAN*
Posts: 2447 - Karma: 5,627
As a non-American, the only thing I see retarded about all the 'Guns vs no guns' bullshit is that you need guns for self defence in order to feel safe. I'm not making a point about gun, rather about American society.
Sep 16 2014 3:35PM
2 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
*DUMBCAN*As a non-American, the only thing I see retarded about all the 'Guns vs no guns' bullshit is that you need guns for self defence in order to feel safe. I'm not making a point about gun, rather about American society.


It is bullshit... it's like people can't fucking defend themselves without a sword. Less guns, more Katanas!

but seriously, it is pretty pathetic if you think about it. We see each other as wild rabid bears.
Sep 16 2014 3:38PM
1 1
profile picture
t_rob
Posts: 6433 - Karma: 11,458
DingoSeanAbsolutely moot point. Note the population density of those three places.

In Wyoming, how the fuck are you going to murder someone.. You can't find your neighbor to begin with...


Have a new set of outliers.

Sep 16 2014 4:06PM
0 0
profile picture
PASKIINGSUCKS
Posts: 9097 - Karma: 777
t_robThis chart compares the ranks of percentage of people who admitted to gun ownership from 2007 census data to 2010 fbi murder rate data for the 50 states and DC.

It was the data available, obviously using the same or multiple years of data would be better and there are better potential metrics about guns than the people admitting to owning them but the data doesn't lie.

I looked at comparing the ownership percentages to murder rates as X,Y but it just recreates the purple graph more or less. I think seeing states and both ranks at the same time tells a better story.

So in DC, the 3.6% of the population own guns but 16.5 per 100k die from gun murders.

In Hawaii, 6.7% of the population own guns but only 0.5 per 100k die from guns.

In Wyoming, 59.7% of people admit to owning guns but 0.9 per 100k die from them.





Tell me, do more guns stop gun murders or do more guns create gun murders? The inverse as well. Or does this data set tell you absolutely nothing about how guns relate to gun murders?


My takeaway: it's not where the guns are, it's who has the guns so everyone should just stop trying to prove something they can't. Also stay the fuck away from DC.


I think that graph tells nothing as it is completely false in numbers. The number of people who admit to having guns does in no way actually tell the real number of people who have guns. Also, pennsylvania has one of the higher gun death or murder numbers, but I'd love to see a split on gun ownership over the whole state compared to where the gun deaths happen. Philly is chocked full of gun deaths and murders, while I'd bet 95% of the gun ownership admitted is outside the city. Every house in rural PA has a gun in it or damn close I'd bet.
Sep 16 2014 4:07PM
1 0
profile picture
howlongcanausern
Posts: 4982 - Karma: 1,737
i wonder if there's a certain demographic or group of people that are responsible for the high rates of gun violence in DC/Chicago?


hmmm.... nah, couldn't be
Sep 16 2014 4:12PM
7 4
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51296 - Karma: 157,981
Doesn't really matter. We elect all kinds of bullshit people into office. We're all about electing career politicians, or rich people that want to take a stab in the limelight, not so good about getting people in that don't suck balls.

Our govt is pretty bunk across the board. Oh well, nothings going to change anytime soon. I don't even vote most of the time because it's hard to find anyone worth voting for.
Sep 16 2014 4:30PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
wepresidentnowi wonder if there's a certain demographic or group of people that are responsible for the high rates of gun violence in DC/Chicago?


hmmm.... nah, couldn't be


...are you seriously going there?
Sep 16 2014 4:31PM
4 3
profile picture
PASKIINGSUCKS
Posts: 9097 - Karma: 777
wepresidentnowi wonder if there's a certain demographic or group of people that are responsible for the high rates of gun violence in DC/Chicago?


hmmm.... nah, couldn't be


I certainly don't think so, at least not here in Philly. (some sarcasm included)

http://www.phillypolice.com/assets/crime-maps-stats/HomicideReport-2013.pdf
Sep 16 2014 4:32PM
2 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
t_robHave a new set of outliers.



That graph is a lot more accurate. Look at how many times the population density matches up with the murder rate...

...and even then it still fails to tell the story.
Sep 16 2014 4:35PM
0 0
profile picture
deleted5
Posts: 14507 - Karma: 13,500
PASKIINGSUCKSI think that graph tells nothing as it is completely false in numbers. The number of people who admit to having guns does in no way actually tell the real number of people who have guns. Also, pennsylvania has one of the higher gun death or murder numbers, but I'd love to see a split on gun ownership over the whole state compared to where the gun deaths happen. Philly is chocked full of gun deaths and murders, while I'd bet 95% of the gun ownership admitted is outside the city. Every house in rural PA has a gun in it or damn close I'd bet.

How about when austraila had a bunch of gun control laws passed and there have been 0 massacres and death suicides rates went down about 60%. That's shows that gun control works curious as to people who are agenst gun control think on that.
Sep 16 2014 5:00PM
0 0
profile picture
AT-AT
Posts: 3281 - Karma: 3,256
zzzskizzzHow about when austraila had a bunch of gun control laws passed and there have been 0 massacres and death suicides rates went down about 60%. That's shows that gun control works curious as to people who are agenst gun control think on that.


Then how do you explain Switzerland?
Sep 16 2014 5:05PM
2 0
profile picture
Bombogenesis
Posts: 1984 - Karma: 4,006
Ralph_Swaggumby fenway? werent they ordered to remove that or something due to how misleading it was?



Maybe but I drove by it last week so they definitely haven't yet
Sep 16 2014 5:08PM
0 0
profile picture
t_rob
Posts: 6433 - Karma: 11,458
zzzskizzzHow about when austraila had a bunch of gun control laws passed and there have been 0 massacres and death suicides rates went down about 60%. That's shows that gun control works curious as to people who are agenst gun control think on that.


Counter argument: England 2003.
Sep 16 2014 5:21PM
1 0
profile picture
PASKIINGSUCKS
Posts: 9097 - Karma: 777
zzzskizzzHow about when austraila had a bunch of gun control laws passed and there have been 0 massacres and death suicides rates went down about 60%. That's shows that gun control works curious as to people who are agenst gun control think on that.


I'm not against all gun control actually.

They're gun control laws were forced, not passed democratically and I would be curious to see how that would even go down in the US. They also enacted huge buyback programs to get rid of guns, which I also would wonder how effective that would be here in the US.

Most of all that movement toward gun control in Australia was spurred by one major massacre, in which the killer admitted to buying the weapons in question illegally. One of the measures I'm all for if we are talking about gun control.

Also, guns are still very much legal and owned in Australia and yes the numbers of gun murder have gone way down.
Sep 16 2014 5:28PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
t_robCounter argument: England 2003.


Counter argument to both: Australia and England aren't the USA, don't have the same culture as the USA, don't have the same gang complex of the USA, don't have the same population spread of the USA and you can't compare one country to another so generally.

Might as well just compare the USA to Burma. Same useless comparative argument applies.
Sep 16 2014 5:28PM
1 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
Anyway, to add my $0.02 to this neverending argument about guns.

Assault weapons (or, in my opinion; any automatic or semi-automatic weapon that's also a derivative of a military weapon - whether rifle or sidearm) should not be as easily obtained as it has been in this country.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. So don't give people guns.
Sep 16 2014 5:32PM
0 1
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10054 - Karma: 25,277
AT-ATThen how do you explain Switzerland?


They are Swiss. And that should tell you enough.
Sep 16 2014 5:33PM
1 0
profile picture
Phil-X-
Posts: 7205 - Karma: 14,399
wepresidentnowi wonder if there's a certain demographic or group of people that are responsible for the high rates of gun violence in DC/Chicago?


hmmm.... nah, couldn't be


Im from the suburbs of Chi and can tell you without a doubt the crime in the city is so high because of poor ethnic neighborhoods with gangs. The crime is the highest in those areas and gets lower when you move away. Almost all those firearms are stolen or black market purchases.

DingoSean...are you seriously going there?


uhh.. yea ....but r u srs m8?

Guns don't kill people..

Gangs and the mentally-ill use guns to kill people..

You need to fix the source of the problem.
Sep 16 2014 5:39PM
7 0
profile picture
PASKIINGSUCKS
Posts: 9097 - Karma: 777
DingoSeanCounter argument to both: Australia and England aren't the USA, don't have the same culture as the USA, don't have the same gang complex of the USA, don't have the same population spread of the USA and you can't compare one country to another so generally.

Might as well just compare the USA to Burma. Same useless comparative argument applies.


Gang complex? Almost everyone in my extended family is a gun owner. None of which are gang members. I kind of see what you're saying though.

My point would be guns are used for many many different things in this country and getting rid of many of them like Australia did IMO would never fly here.
Sep 16 2014 5:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Gods_Father
Posts: 1466 - Karma: -284
DingoSeanIt is bullshit... it's like people can't fucking defend themselves without a sword. Less guns, more Katanas!

but seriously, it is pretty pathetic if you think about it. We see each other as wild rabid bears.


you would honestly feel comfortable letting your 90 year old grandmother have only 1 way to defend her life? and that 1 way is to physically fight at 90 years of age......possibly fighting someone much younger and healthier too lol you're clueless. countless accounts of old women using a gun to fend off an attacker when they would have otherwise had no other way to effectively defend their life.
Sep 16 2014 5:53PM
2 0
profile picture
Bombogenesis
Posts: 1984 - Karma: 4,006
DingoSeanIt is bullshit... it's like people can't fucking defend themselves without a sword. Less guns, more Katanas!

but seriously, it is pretty pathetic if you think about it. We see each other as wild rabid bears.


We don't necessarily see each other as rabid bears Sean... More that we know there are some crazy people out there. If one of those crazy people breaks into my house I want to be ready for it before they kill my dog or my gf. I don't distrust everyone.. Instead I know there are some loonies no matter how small a percentage of the population they are.
Sep 16 2014 5:58PM
3 0
profile picture
Gods_Father
Posts: 1466 - Karma: -284
DingoSeanGuns don't kill people. People kill people. So don't give people guns.


hey while you're at it, might as well not give them bows and arrows or knives.
Sep 16 2014 6:02PM
3 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,349
wepresidentnowif the government asked me to turn in my guns, i would.

i really hope your kidding.
Sep 16 2014 6:30PM
0 0
profile picture
howlongcanausern
Posts: 4982 - Karma: 1,737
SFBi really hope your kidding.


honestly? no.

only have a couple of rifles and a shotgun. don't ever shoot them, don't ever need them, and no, nobody is going to burglarize me. although, rural oregon doesn't have a ton of "ethnic neighborhoods" where violent crime is high so i guess i have nothing to worry about besides the one off meth addict.


rather take the $1500 or so they're worth and put that to something more worthwhile in life

if you wanna own guns, not my business, go for it. all you buddy.

maybe i'm getting to be an old man but putting money to travel/real estate is a hell of a lot more rewarding than just buying more stuff
Sep 16 2014 7:01PM
1 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,349
wepresidentnowhonestly? no.

only have a couple of rifles and a shotgun. don't ever shoot them, don't ever need them, and no, nobody is going to burglarize me. although, rural oregon doesn't have a ton of "ethnic neighborhoods" where violent crime is high so i guess i have nothing to worry about besides the one off meth addict.


rather take the $1500 or so they're worth and put that to something more worthwhile in life

if you wanna own guns, not my business, go for it. all you buddy.

maybe i'm getting to be an old man but putting money to travel/real estate is a hell of a lot more rewarding than just buying more stuff

im thinking more that it would be a direct violation of the constitution which is not ok. i feel like "shall not be infringed upon" is pretty clear.
Sep 16 2014 7:22PM
1 0
profile picture
p-fo
Posts: 9372 - Karma: 6,155
At this point, the best solution I've heard put forth is mandatory background checks for all purchases, public and private, based on some kind of national database tied to criminal records, gun manufacturing records, and (if possible) mental health records. We can set up a system very similar to that used for cars, where you have to have a title and registration on file with a government entity. We should have a waiting period of some kind (which may not apply to all classes of guns) to help prevent people with clean records who are under some kind of emotional or other stress from doing bad shit out of nowhere.
You see this? It doesn't take away or ban guns, which is dumb for various reasons, but it still tackles a very real problem.
Sep 16 2014 7:53PM
2 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
Hey folks!!!

Whats the murder rate like in the UK where guns are nearly impossible to get?

Oh, really fucking low you say?
Sep 16 2014 8:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Phil-X-
Posts: 7205 - Karma: 14,399
wepresidentnowhonestly? no.

only have a couple of rifles and a shotgun. don't ever shoot them, don't ever need them, and no, nobody is going to burglarize me. although, rural oregon doesn't have a ton of "ethnic neighborhoods" where violent crime is high so i guess i have nothing to worry about besides the one off meth addict.


rather take the $1500 or so they're worth and put that to something more worthwhile in life

if you wanna own guns, not my business, go for it. all you buddy.

maybe i'm getting to be an old man but putting money to travel/real estate is a hell of a lot more rewarding than just buying more stuff


well shit what you got? looking to sell?
Sep 16 2014 8:44PM
1 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,349
californiagrownHey folks!!!

Whats the murder rate like in the UK where guns are nearly impossible to get?

Oh, really fucking low you say?


Sep 16 2014 9:16PM
2 0
profile picture
arnie_grape
Posts: 3441 - Karma: 11,482
t_robThis chart compares the ranks of percentage of people who admitted to gun ownership from 2007 census data to 2010 fbi murder rate data for the 50 states and DC.

It was the data available, obviously using the same or multiple years of data would be better and there are better potential metrics about guns than the people admitting to owning them but the data doesn't lie.

I looked at comparing the ownership percentages to murder rates as X,Y but it just recreates the purple graph more or less. I think seeing states and both ranks at the same time tells a better story.

So in DC, the 3.6% of the population own guns but 16.5 per 100k die from gun murders.

In Hawaii, 6.7% of the population own guns but only 0.5 per 100k die from guns.

In Wyoming, 59.7% of people admit to owning guns but 0.9 per 100k die from them.





Tell me, do more guns stop gun murders or do more guns create gun murders? The inverse as well. Or does this data set tell you absolutely nothing about how guns relate to gun murders?


My takeaway: it's not where the guns are, it's who has the guns so everyone should just stop trying to prove something they can't. Also stay the fuck away from DC.

why the hell would you use a line graph
Sep 16 2014 9:18PM
0 0
profile picture
deleted5
Posts: 14507 - Karma: 13,500
PASKIINGSUCKSI'm not against all gun control actually.

They're gun control laws were forced, not passed democratically and I would be curious to see how that would even go down in the US. They also enacted huge buyback programs to get rid of guns, which I also would wonder how effective that would be here in the US.

Most of all that movement toward gun control in Australia was spurred by one major massacre, in which the killer admitted to buying the weapons in question illegally. One of the measures I'm all for if we are talking about gun control.

Also, guns are still very much legal and owned in Australia and yes the numbers of gun murder have gone way down.

thank you for a real response the other two just named countries and wasn't an argument.
Sep 16 2014 9:32PM
0 0
profile picture
howlongcanausern
Posts: 4982 - Karma: 1,737
Phil-X-well shit what you got? looking to sell?


Savage Model 24F-G (I think that's what it is anyway...): http://www.cylindersmith.com/savage24/sav1.jpg

pretty rad gun, .22Mag over 20 gauge shotgun, single shot breakaway.

prolly want $600 for that one.



and a merlin bolt action .22 not anything special...I'm not sure if I'd be willing to ship cuz it doesn't break down like the savage
Sep 16 2014 9:32PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
SFB


so how many murders are there in the UK? I seriously dont know. Please inform me.
Sep 16 2014 9:34PM
0 0
profile picture
milk_man
Posts: 5214 - Karma: 6,497
Banning guns is stupid. Guns are banned in Chicago and yet that city has some of the highest rates of gun violence.


Stop banning guns and ban gangstas
Sep 16 2014 9:35PM
1 1
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,684
milk_manStop banning guns and ban gangstas


Everyone who now acts gangsta on this site will be given a ban.

Green names don't ban gangstas, gangstas ban gangstas.
Sep 16 2014 10:00PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)