In response to:

Merry Christmas, Comrades

Jay Wye Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 2:25 PM
registering autos doesn't stop autos from being stolen and used in crimes. And nobody prosecutes a car owner for what some criminal did with his auto after stealing it.
gjmlb Wrote: Dec 30, 2012 12:05 AM
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:55 PM
Haha, you're the expert. You tell me.
A American Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:44 PM
actually it happens frequently, if you watch the news.Every year there is a city whose people on sidewalks are run down and killed.
Ever count the number of deer on the side of a road, so yes a car can kill.
A firearm is for protection, liberals look at firearms as a offensive tool. Gun owners look a them as a defensive tool.
slk Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:42 PM
Cars kill animals all the time.....
slk Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:41 PM
Okay, arsenic is a poison. Outlaw it--it kills. What other purpose could it possibly have? This is a really, really stupid argument. Most guns NEVER are used to kill people, only dinner in some cases. Sometimes not all. Okay, vegans can complain, though dinner can be obtained by other means. If killing is the only purpose, why do people who NEVER killed anyone or anything own many guns. If they have NO other purpose, explain why someone spends money on a gun and then does not use it to kill anything? You can't because you know not of what you speak.
Does it count how many school buses are hit by drunk drivers??????
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:37 PM
Try this brand new thing called a "search engine". Only incompetence could possibly explain such lack of knowledge on your part.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:26 PM
I would love to hear the "etc". Inflicting physical harm also does apply to animals (and no, I'm not against hunting or anything of the sort). Numerous cases of people running down over a dozen children with cars? Why didn't I ever hear about this?
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:18 PM
Actually, firearms can be used for hunting, target shooting, etc. There have been numerous cases of individuals deliberately harming others (including children at a bus stop) with vehicles, Your "big differences" amount to literally nothing at all.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 4:04 PM
One is for transportation, one is for inflicting physical harm. A car can be used to inflict physical harm, but a gun cannot be used for transportation. Another big difference: how may sociopaths have driven cars into schools and used them to murder children?
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 3:58 PM
Yes, there is absolutely no relevant difference between a vehicle and a firearm. Both are tools that serve a specific and useful purpose. Both can be deadly if misuused but the freedom of their use yields benefits far greater than their restriction.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 2:36 PM
Yes, there is absolutely no difference between a vehicle and a firearm...

Wendy60 wrote: The neoconservatives are the reason why Boehner is not putting up a fight. The neocons do the thinking for the Republican leadership on all matters of strategy and morality in politics. Boehner wouldn't take a dump if the neocons told him not to, and if they told him to do so, he would strain for hours. Neocons want tax increases, because paying higher taxes is a sacrifice. Neocons believe that the little people have to be forced into sacrificing for the "collective self," i.e., the state, because that is the only way to preserve the social order. What they...