OT: Gun ownership...

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 2:37:27 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 1:58:44 AM UTC-7, Don Y wrote:
On 10/12/2022 12:18 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 10/10/22 12:00 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 10/9/2022 11:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 10/9/22 12:19 PM, Don Y wrote:

<snip>

> Here is an astonishing fact: Democrats are more likely to be victims of violent crimes than Republicans. They are poorer and live in more dangerous neighborhoods.

All facts.

> Consequently, they are more likely to be interested in self-defense than Republicans.

A deduction, rather than a fact.

Defensive gun use isn\'t a myth - it is a FACT:
https://datavisualizations.heritage.org/firearms/defensive-gun-uses-in-the-us/

\"There’s good reason to believe that most defensive gun uses are never reported to law enforcement, much less picked up by local or national media outlets. \"

In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use, presumably not enough to justify the real dangers of having a gun around the house, of which suicide by gun tops the list.Being right-wing lunatics they ignore that risk.

A gun is a tool just like any other. Now, I wouldn\'t give a Skil-Saw to an ignorant person w/o training and supervision - the same goes for guns.

You can own guns for many years and not have to use them. But one day you may. My brother was a cop on the SFPD for many years, and, of course, carried a gun every day. He never had to use it for many years until one day there was a hostage situation in a high-rise office building. He was close to the scene and responded. He talked about going up the stairwell as workers were streaming downwards in shear terror. As he got closer to the floor in question he could smell the cordite (gun powder). Entering the floor he saw the problem: one person was already dead on the floor and bleeding, a woman was being held at gun-point by the perp with a shotgun. The shotgun had a wire loop tied to it, which was around the head of the woman, and the perp had his finger on the trigger. The perp was the ex-boyfriend who was convinced that his ex-girl friend was screwing her supervisor (the dead guy). He was screaming stuff that was pretty much incomprehensible. There were FOUR cops there by then, each with their service revolver pointed at the perp. One was trying to talk the guy into releasing his ex-girl friend, but he wasn\'t listening. Then, there was a distraction (door slam or something), the perp looked away to see what it was and briefly took his finger off of the trigger; all four cops, including my brother, fired simultaneously, killing the perp. END OF STORY! This was the ONE AND ONLY time my brother had to use his gun in anger during his entire career.

So he has risked his life and lives of his family members to be in a position to use it on a single occasion. He was trained in it\'s use and had to practice using the gun at regular intervals. Concealed carry users are less constrained.

> I don\'t care what you think you would do in this situation, or if you will ever be in the situation. It doesn\'t matter. But DON\'T YOU EVER decide FOR ME!!!!

Gnatguy hasn\'t noticed that he makes bad decisions every time he posts something here. Having a guy with his risible cognitive skills wandering around with a concealed and loaded gun isn\'t making the community any safer - quite the reverse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[corvid]

On 10/20/22 20:37, Flyspeck wrote:

A gun is a tool just like any other. Now, I wouldn\'t give a Skil-Saw
to an ignorant person w/o training and supervision - the same goes
for guns.

YOU DON\'T decide who should handle SkilSaws or guns.

I don\'t care what you think you would do in this situation, or if
you will ever be in the situation. It doesn\'t matter. But DON\'T YOU
EVER decide FOR ME!!!!

The ignorant person above uses your argument, and enjoys the same
privileges.

 

[DemonicTubes]

On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEdWbBn4yMU&list=PLr9w0uxRdNytiQ9rTHfaG_soJSLFXvFPt
(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills)

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house? I have yet to hear about logical gun control measures that wouldn\'t disarm lawful citizens while leaving violent criminals armed. Never mind the constitutional issues involved. To put it in perspective, you also need to understand the mindset of many Americans. Very much a do-it-yourself pioneer-minded society (not all or even most, but it is a strong thread that runs through the people here).

People who haven\'t spent much time in the \"bad\" parts of the US just don\'t seem to understand. Our media does not give an accurate picture of our society. With the recent cuts to law enforcement and the rising violent crime, self-defense is more important than ever.

Pointing out rednecks that believe ridiculous things or conservatives that spout nonsense (a common tactic of left-leaners) doesn\'t necessarily make responsible gun owners wrong. Guilt by association and all that...

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:

On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:

<snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

> (it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does hapen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

> Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

> I have yet to hear about logical gun control measures that wouldn\'t disarm lawful citizens while leaving violent criminals armed. Never mind the constitutional issues involved. To put it in perspective, you also need to understand the mindset of many Americans. Very much a do-it-yourself pioneer-minded society (not all or even most, but it is a strong thread that runs through the people here).

A little bit of education might help that.

> People who haven\'t spent much time in the \"bad\" parts of the US just don\'t seem to understand. Our media does not give an accurate picture of our society. With the recent cuts to law enforcement and the rising violent crime, self-defense is more important than ever.

And totally stupid. Having a gun in the house might allow you to defend yourself against the very rare home invasion, but it leaves you vulnerable to the occasional suicidal urge, which don\'t happen all that often either, but rather more frequently than home invasions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

> Pointing out rednecks that believe ridiculous things or conservatives that spout nonsense (a common tactic of left-leaners) doesn\'t necessarily make responsible gun owners wrong. Guilt by association and all that...

But they are wrong. They just can\'t believe that they will ever want to kill themselves, briefly and irrationally, which can lead to unfortunate outcomes if you have a gun handy. Other family members can have the same problem too.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:50:55 PM UTC-7, corvid wrote:

On 10/20/22 20:37, Flyspeck wrote:

A gun is a tool just like any other. Now, I wouldn\'t give a Skil-Saw
to an ignorant person w/o training and supervision - the same goes
for guns.
YOU DON\'T decide who should handle SkilSaws or guns.

If it is MY saw or gun I sure as hell do.

I don\'t care what you think you would do in this situation, or if
you will ever be in the situation. It doesn\'t matter. But DON\'T YOU
EVER decide FOR ME!!!!
The ignorant person above uses your argument, and enjoys the same
privileges.

Hey, that IS the argument that pro-abortion people use.

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does hapen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?
After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.
South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time.. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.
South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).
It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.
Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.
The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee..org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.
South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).
It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.
Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.
South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).
It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.
Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?
If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker. Bozo should understand the law in his own country.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker.

But not necessarily an outlaw. People break the law all the time, and you have to do it publicly and ostentatiously to be recognised as a outlaw.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outlaw

1 : a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law
2a : a lawless person or a fugitive from the law
b : a person or organization under a ban or restriction
c : one that is unconventional or rebellious
3 : an animal (such as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable

> Bill should understand the law in his own country.

Gnatguy should put in some work on understanding English. Granting his enthusiasm for misunderstanding English in ways that suit his demented point of view, we can be fairly confident that he won\'t.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:09:54 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker.
But not necessarily an outlaw. People break the law all the time, and you have to do it publicly and ostentatiously to be recognised as a outlaw.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outlaw

1 : a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law
2a : a lawless person or a fugitive from the law
b : a person or organization under a ban or restriction
c : one that is unconventional or rebellious
3 : an animal (such as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable

Bill should understand the law in his own country.

Gnatguy should put in some work on understanding English. Granting his enthusiasm for misunderstanding English in ways that suit his demented point of view, we can be fairly confident that he won\'t.

--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney

Hey Bozo, to own a firearm in Australia requires a license. If you take that unlicensed firearm into a public place you ARE breaking the law, whether it is noticed or not. Each state in Australia has its own laws that detail the penalty for these insults to law and order. In New South Wales, where you live, the penalty for having an unlicensed firearm in public (and not actually firing it) is imprisonment for up to TEN YEARS!

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 3:46:24 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:09:54 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker.
But not necessarily an outlaw. People break the law all the time, and you have to do it publicly and ostentatiously to be recognised as a outlaw.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outlaw

1 : a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law
2a : a lawless person or a fugitive from the law
b : a person or organization under a ban or restriction
c : one that is unconventional or rebellious
3 : an animal (such as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable

Bill should understand the law in his own country.

Gnatguy should put in some work on understanding English. Granting his enthusiasm for misunderstanding English in ways that suit his demented point of view, we can be fairly confident that he won\'t.

Hey Bozo, to own a firearm in Australia requires a license. If you take that unlicensed firearm into a public place you ARE breaking the law, whether it is noticed or not. Each state in Australia has its own laws that detail the penalty for these insults to law and order. In New South Wales, where you live, the penalty for having an unlicensed firearm in public (and not actually firing it) is imprisonment for up to TEN YEARS!

Seems reasonable. The criminals who do actually carry unlicensed firearm in public places are mostly drug dealers.

The side effects of this kind of regulation does seem to be that we haven\'t had a gun massacre since the Port Arthur back in 1996. The US hasn\'t been so lucky.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:44:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 3:46:24 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:09:54 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society.. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs..

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker.
But not necessarily an outlaw. People break the law all the time, and you have to do it publicly and ostentatiously to be recognised as a outlaw..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outlaw

1 : a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law
2a : a lawless person or a fugitive from the law
b : a person or organization under a ban or restriction
c : one that is unconventional or rebellious
3 : an animal (such as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable

Bill should understand the law in his own country.

Gnatguy should put in some work on understanding English. Granting his enthusiasm for misunderstanding English in ways that suit his demented point of view, we can be fairly confident that he won\'t.

Hey Bozo, to own a firearm in Australia requires a license. If you take that unlicensed firearm into a public place you ARE breaking the law, whether it is noticed or not. Each state in Australia has its own laws that detail the penalty for these insults to law and order. In New South Wales, where you live, the penalty for having an unlicensed firearm in public (and not actually firing it) is imprisonment for up to TEN YEARS!
Seems reasonable. The criminals who do actually carry unlicensed firearm in public places are mostly drug dealers.

No Bozo, that could be ANYBODY who didn\'t want to comply with the firearm confiscation law. And it totally REFUTES your claim that people who don\'t comply with this confiscation law aren\'t law breakers.

The side effects of this kind of regulation does seem to be that we haven\'t had a gun massacre since the Port Arthur back in 1996. The US hasn\'t been so lucky.

Doesn\'t sound like there was an epidemic to begin with. This is just a huge over-reaction by a bunch of scared bureaucrats.

--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 4:37:48 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:44:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 3:46:24 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:09:54 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership..

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker.
But not necessarily an outlaw. People break the law all the time, and you have to do it publicly and ostentatiously to be recognised as a outlaw.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outlaw

1 : a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law
2a : a lawless person or a fugitive from the law
b : a person or organization under a ban or restriction
c : one that is unconventional or rebellious
3 : an animal (such as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable

Bill should understand the law in his own country.

Gnatguy should put in some work on understanding English. Granting his enthusiasm for misunderstanding English in ways that suit his demented point of view, we can be fairly confident that he won\'t.

Hey Bozo, to own a firearm in Australia requires a license. If you take that unlicensed firearm into a public place you ARE breaking the law, whether it is noticed or not. Each state in Australia has its own laws that detail the penalty for these insults to law and order. In New South Wales, where you live, the penalty for having an unlicensed firearm in public (and not actually firing it) is imprisonment for up to TEN YEARS!

Seems reasonable. The criminals who do actually carry unlicensed firearm in public places are mostly drug dealers.

No Bozo, that could be ANYBODY who didn\'t want to comply with the firearm confiscation law. And it totally REFUTES your claim that people who don\'t comply with this confiscation law aren\'t law breakers.

I said that they weren\'t outlaws, which is a different word with a different meaning from law-breaker.

The side effects of this kind of regulation does seem to be that we haven\'t had a gun massacre since the Port Arthur back in 1996. The US hasn\'t been so lucky.
Doesn\'t sound like there was an epidemic to begin with. This is just a huge over-reaction by a bunch of scared bureaucrats.

With a tenth pf the population of the US gun massacres in Australia were pretty sparse before 1996, but they did happen. They haven\'t happened since then.

The US tolerance of the phenomena does look like a gross and moronic under-reaction. And you are the kind of gross moron who wouldn\'t realise it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 11:10:08 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 4:37:48 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:44:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 3:46:24 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:09:54 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
In other words they couldn\'t find much evidence of defensive gun use

Meanwhile, these guys post videos almost every day of firearms being successfully used defensively:
snipped gun trade commercials

Hollywood did the same for years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Wish_(film_series)

The people that sell guns were delighted, and presumably financed the sequels.

(it is an excellent channel by the way for anybody interested in increasing their self-defense skills).

And making it more likely that their next attempted suicide will succeed - which does happen to be the major cost of gun ownership.

South Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but also one of the LOWEST gun ownership rates, proving that guns have NOTHING to do with suicide (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country).

It doesn\'t prove anything of the sort.

Anybody who uses a gun to kill themselves demonstrates that a gun can have quite a lot to do with a particular suicide.

The problem is that attempted suicide by gun succeeds about 90% of the time. Most other methods only have a 10% success rate.

Look, we can\'t deny that guns are dangerous for society. The problem with the US is the sheer amount of guns available. It is too late to ban guns here...that cow left the barn years ago. How would they do that anyway? Go house to house?

After the Port Arthur massacre in Australian the government ran a gun buy back scheme.

This was a gun CONFISCATION scheme that was improperly called a buy-back.

The gun possession laws were changed at the same time, and quite a few of the guns bought back had become illegal, so the buy-backs were coupled with gun law amnesties, but it wasn\'t a gun confiscation scheme. Nobody bothered to do house to house searches to catch up with the hold-outs.

People who made it obvious that they had guns when they shouldn\'t presumably did get chased up, but there was never a lot of fuss made about doing it.

HA HA HA HA! Gun confiscation by another name. IF you didn\'t turn it in you became an outlaw, RIGHT?

If you turn it in, it isn\'t being confiscated. You can\'t become an outlaw until you have been identified as breaking the law, and for that to happen you\'d have had to make a public display of owning a gun.That didn\'t seem to happen.

Gnatguy wants to describe what happened in Australia in terms that suit him, but he\'s being just as unrealistic here as he is everywhere else.

The guns in question are illegal to own under Australian law. Possessing said gun is a violation of the law, making the possessor a law breaker.
But not necessarily an outlaw. People break the law all the time, and you have to do it publicly and ostentatiously to be recognised as a outlaw.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outlaw

1 : a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law
2a : a lawless person or a fugitive from the law
b : a person or organization under a ban or restriction
c : one that is unconventional or rebellious
3 : an animal (such as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable

Bill should understand the law in his own country.

Gnatguy should put in some work on understanding English. Granting his enthusiasm for misunderstanding English in ways that suit his demented point of view, we can be fairly confident that he won\'t.

Hey Bozo, to own a firearm in Australia requires a license. If you take that unlicensed firearm into a public place you ARE breaking the law, whether it is noticed or not. Each state in Australia has its own laws that detail the penalty for these insults to law and order. In New South Wales, where you live, the penalty for having an unlicensed firearm in public (and not actually firing it) is imprisonment for up to TEN YEARS!

Seems reasonable. The criminals who do actually carry unlicensed firearm in public places are mostly drug dealers.

No Bozo, that could be ANYBODY who didn\'t want to comply with the firearm confiscation law. And it totally REFUTES your claim that people who don\'t comply with this confiscation law aren\'t law breakers.
I said that they weren\'t outlaws, which is a different word with a different meaning from law-breaker.

That is a difference WITHOUT a distinction, Bozo.

The side effects of this kind of regulation does seem to be that we haven\'t had a gun massacre since the Port Arthur back in 1996. The US hasn\'t been so lucky.
Doesn\'t sound like there was an epidemic to begin with. This is just a huge over-reaction by a bunch of scared bureaucrats.
With a tenth pf the population of the US gun massacres in Australia were pretty sparse before 1996, but they did happen. They haven\'t happened since then.

And the gun confiscation was TOTALLY an OVER-REACTION

The US tolerance of the phenomena does look like a gross and moronic under-reaction. And you are the kind of gross moron who wouldn\'t realise it.

There are TOO MANY libtard politicians unwilling to ENFORCE EXISTING GUN LAWS in the US. If they were enforced these murders would be a thing of the past.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:55:11 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 11:10:08 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 4:37:48 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:44:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 3:46:24 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:09:54 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:44:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 2:56:58 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:28:32 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:58:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:37:40 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:02 AM UTC+11, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:25:53 PM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

<snip>

I said that they weren\'t outlaws, which is a different word with a different meaning from law-breaker.

That is a difference WITHOUT a distinction.

It may be a distinction you can\'t understand, but it is a real difference. Do try to keep in mind that you are remarkably stupid.

The side effects of this kind of regulation does seem to be that we haven\'t had a gun massacre since the Port Arthur back in 1996. The US hasn\'t been so lucky.
Doesn\'t sound like there was an epidemic to begin with. This is just a huge over-reaction by a bunch of scared bureaucrats.
With a tenth pf the population of the US gun massacres in Australia were pretty sparse before 1996, but they did happen. They haven\'t happened since then.

And the gun confiscation was TOTALLY an OVER-REACTION.

It removed a whole lot of guns that weren\'t serving any useful purpose and were creating unnecessary risks.

Do feel free to identify what you think might have been an appropriate reaction. America is still having gun massacres - Australia isn\'t, so your attitude does look more like favouring a total non-reaction

The US tolerance of the phenomena does look like a gross and moronic under-reaction. And you are the kind of gross moron who wouldn\'t realise it.

There are TOO MANY libtard politicians unwilling to ENFORCE EXISTING GUN LAWS in the US. If they were enforced these murders would be a thing of the past.

An implausible claim.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Mark Eva]

Hey guys , if interested in getting quality firearms like Rifle, Digsauer, Glock , Ammo etc.
you can contact this guys for more details.
they got varieties firearms and sweet delivery service.
website👇👇


Wicker: jayanderson09

https://rageammostore.com/

 

[Mark Eva]

Hey guys , if interested in getting quality firearms like Rifle, Digsauer, Glock , Ammo etc.
you can contact this guys for more details.
they got varieties firearms and sweet delivery service.
website👇👇


Wicker: jayanderson09

https://rageammostore.com/

 

[Mark Eva]

Hey guys , if interested in getting quality firearms like Rifle, Digsauer, Glock , Ammo etc.
you can contact this guys for more details.
they got varieties firearms and sweet delivery service.
website👇👇


Wicker: jayanderson09

https://rageammostore.com/