Political Crossfire Forums

[Lucky Luke]

The Comrade wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: You made a claim The Comrade, I can't see you backing it up.

Alaska has a higher murder rate than New York.

i can't see you backing up your claim that america is some lawless country with people running around shooting eachother.

Lucky Luke wrote: Strict gun control laws should be passed based on the places where they are most needed, where most of the people live, the cities, and lawless Alaska of course.

i would rather have a gun in the city to protect myself.

Lucky Luke wrote: At the end it came down to taxation.

i don't know what weird british history books you're reading but i think you need to read up on the american revolution again.

Alaska seems to be the place The Comrade, not New York of course.

This is what the city doesn't need, the people of the city Richmond, VA are finding that out.

Quote:


Colonial America
No Taxation without Representation
The American Revolution

Sending money to Britain was not seen as a good idea anymore.

:-D
:-D

[Lucky Luke]

lilwolf wrote:

It's been looked at before and was found to be to costly, and to much red tape. Crashed and burned about the time the bogus brady thing came on . Congress and the senate said it was not worth the cost and an infringement upon rights of americans. so you lose.

Did they really? I don't believe you.

CCW background checks are paid for by the applicant, legal gun dealers are adding the cost of any regulation imposed on them to the customer, there is no reason to believe that it can't be done the same way for gun shows and private sales.

:-D
:-D

[lilwolf]

Lucky Luke wrote: lilwolf wrote:

It's been looked at before and was found to be to costly, and to much red tape. Crashed and burned about the time the bogus brady thing came on . Congress and the senate said it was not worth the cost and an infringement upon rights of americans. so you lose.

Did they really? I don't believe you.

CCW background checks are paid for by the applicant, legal gun dealers are adding the cost of any regulation imposed on them to the customer, there is no reason to believe that it can't be done the same way for gun shows and private sales.

:-D
:-D

You don't believe it....so what . My state said no clear out and out.

So you don't like it so what ..it is not happening and that is a damn good thing. There are already laws on the books that say clearly that if you sell knoingly a gun to a criminal you are toast. That's good enough for me and the majority of people in my state and many other states.
So what if you don't like it..... you don't matter at all anyway in the grand scheme of things in this country and that is also a damn good thing. :lol: :lol:

[The Comrade]

Lucky Luke wrote: Alaska seems to be the place The Comrade, not New York of course.

This is what the city doesn't need, the people of the city Richmond, VA are finding that out.

care to back up this claim?

Lucky Luke wrote: Quote:


Colonial America
No Taxation without Representation
The American Revolution

Sending money to Britain was not seen as a good idea anymore.

you don't know a thing about american history.

so to put an end to this i will explain the revolution to you.

england fights france in the 7 years war. england has a war debot of 140 million pounds(an obscene number for the day). england also has a problem with smugglers. england orders taxation on most goods. colonists are mad, but whatev. the stamp act is repealed and things seem to be getting better. now comes washington and george madison. madison brainwashes washington with radical whig ideology and claims england is trying to enslave the colonists. this is not the truth. no taxation without representation was a minor part of the revolution. when mass protest started and radicals like sam adams started terrorizing torries, the king declares the colonies in open rebellion and passes the intolerable acts. the intolerable acts included the Massachusetts Government Act,
Administration of Justice Act, Boston Port Act, Quartering Act.


Massachusetts Government Act wrote: The act did away with elections for the councilors and assistants in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, making the positions appointive, the appointments to be made by "his Majesty's commission, under the great seal of Great Britain", the positions to be held "during the pleasure of his Majesty".

Administration of Justice Act wrote: The act effectively abolished the local administration of justice, providing that the Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony could direct that any inquisition, indictment or appeal be tried in Great Britain or in another British Colony, providing for coercing any witnesses to appear at such a trial, and requiring bail for any person accused of a "capital crime in the execution of their duty."

Boston Port Act wrote: A response to the Boston Tea Party, it outlawed the use of the Port of Boston (by setting up a barricade/blockade) for "landing and discharging, lading or shipping, of goods, wares, and merchandise" until such time as restitution was made to the King's treasury (for customs duty lost) and to the East India Company for damages suffered

Quartering Act wrote: In 1774, Parliament passed a group of laws entitled the Coercive Acts (the colonists called them the Intolerable Acts) designed to restore imperial control over the American colonies. All the Coercive Acts dealt specifically with Massachusetts, except one, a new Quartering Act, which applied to all thirteen colonies. This Quartering Act extended the provisions of the earlier legislation; it required that troops be housed not only in commercial and empty buildings but in occupied dwellings as well. The law was bitterly protested, symbolizing as it did to the colonists the potential dangers and abuses of standing armies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts

these "intolerable acts" are what set the colonits over the edge. now the colonies were really in open rebellion.

once again now enters washington. he sends the olive-branch petition to the king calling for an end to hostilities and essentially open up negotiations so that the colonists could live in peace with england. the king declared the colonies in open rebellion and disregarded the petition.

several years of fighting later and you have american independence.

[Lucky Luke]

The Comrade wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: Alaska seems to be the place The Comrade, not New York of course.

This is what the city doesn't need, the people of the city Richmond, VA are finding that out.

care to back up this claim?

Lucky Luke wrote: Quote:


Colonial America
No Taxation without Representation
The American Revolution

Sending money to Britain was not seen as a good idea anymore.

you don't know a thing about american history.

so to put an end to this i will explain the revolution to you.

england fights france in the 7 years war. england has a war debot of 140 million pounds(an obscene number for the day). england also has a problem with smugglers. england orders taxation on most goods. colonists are mad, but whatev. the stamp act is repealed and things seem to be getting better. now comes washington and george madison. madison brainwashes washington with radical whig ideology and claims england is trying to enslave the colonists. this is not the truth. no taxation without representation was a minor part of the revolution. when mass protest started and radicals like sam adams started terrorizing torries, the king declares the colonies in open rebellion and passes the intolerable acts. the intolerable acts included the Massachusetts Government Act,
Administration of Justice Act, Boston Port Act, Quartering Act.


Massachusetts Government Act wrote: The act did away with elections for the councilors and assistants in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, making the positions appointive, the appointments to be made by "his Majesty's commission, under the great seal of Great Britain", the positions to be held "during the pleasure of his Majesty".

Administration of Justice Act wrote: The act effectively abolished the local administration of justice, providing that the Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony could direct that any inquisition, indictment or appeal be tried in Great Britain or in another British Colony, providing for coercing any witnesses to appear at such a trial, and requiring bail for any person accused of a "capital crime in the execution of their duty."

Boston Port Act wrote: A response to the Boston Tea Party, it outlawed the use of the Port of Boston (by setting up a barricade/blockade) for "landing and discharging, lading or shipping, of goods, wares, and merchandise" until such time as restitution was made to the King's treasury (for customs duty lost) and to the East India Company for damages suffered

Quartering Act wrote: In 1774, Parliament passed a group of laws entitled the Coercive Acts (the colonists called them the Intolerable Acts) designed to restore imperial control over the American colonies. All the Coercive Acts dealt specifically with Massachusetts, except one, a new Quartering Act, which applied to all thirteen colonies. This Quartering Act extended the provisions of the earlier legislation; it required that troops be housed not only in commercial and empty buildings but in occupied dwellings as well. The law was bitterly protested, symbolizing as it did to the colonists the potential dangers and abuses of standing armies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts

these "intolerable acts" are what set the colonits over the edge. now the colonies were really in open rebellion.

once again now enters washington. he sends the olive-branch petition to the king calling for an end to hostilities and essentially open up negotiations so that the colonists could live in peace with england. the king declared the colonies in open rebellion and disregarded the petition.

several years of fighting later and you have american independence.

I was all about taxation The Comrade, all about the money. See what happened after the stamp act was repealed, things did not get better:

Quote: The Townshend Acts were repealed in 1770, and it was still possible that further troubles with the colonies might be avoided. However, the third wave of protest came because the British government deliberately left one tax from the Townshend Acts in place as a symbolic gesture of their right to tax the colonies—the tax on tea. For the revolutionaries, who stood firmly on the principle that only their colonial representatives could levy taxes on them, it was still "one tax too many". Protests up and down the colonies resulted in no tea being brought in, except in Boston. Outraged Bostonians on Dec. 16, 1773, staged the Boston Tea Party, in which men disguised in Indian costumes dumped the tea into Boston Harbor. The King decided that act of defiance had to be punished severely.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution#Origins:_Taxation_without_Representation

What did you think the Boston tea party was about?
:-D
:-D

[The Comrade]

okay.


i'm done explaining.


have fun being neck deep in false history.

also, the boston tea party happened three years before the revolution broke out. don't claim this was what started it.

[Lucky Luke]

The Comrade wrote: okay.


i'm done explaining.


have fun being neck deep in false history.

also, the boston tea party happened three years before the revolution broke out. don't claim this was what started it.

No, what started it was before when England needed all the money it could get.

:-D
:-D

[lilwolf]

:rotf: :rotf: :rotf:

[The Comrade]

Lucky Luke wrote: No, what started it was before when England needed all the money it could get.



:roll:

it must be hard to walk when you're so blind and in the dark.

[Lucky Luke]

The Comrade wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: No, what started it was before when England needed all the money it could get.



:roll:

it must be hard to walk when you're so blind and in the dark.

Then it is the blind leading the blind:

The Comrade wrote: .....england fights france in the 7 years war. england has a war debot of 140 million pounds(an obscene number for the day). england also has a problem with smugglers. england orders taxation on most goods.....

In fact the Americans refused to participate to the war effort.

:-D
:-D

[The Comrade]

Lucky Luke wrote: The Comrade wrote: .....england fights france in the 7 years war. england has a war debot of 140 million pounds(an obscene number for the day). england also has a problem with smugglers. england orders taxation on most goods.....

In fact the Americans refused to participate to the war effort.


guess what american president was also a major in the british army in the french and indian war.


the reason the colonists didn't participate in the war was because they had no real army. they were at the mercy of the british.

[Lucky Luke]

The Comrade wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: The Comrade wrote: .....england fights france in the 7 years war. england has a war debot of 140 million pounds(an obscene number for the day). england also has a problem with smugglers. england orders taxation on most goods.....

In fact the Americans refused to participate to the war effort.


guess what american president was also a major in the british army in the french and indian war.


the reason the colonists didn't participate in the war was because they had no real army. they were at the mercy of the british.

I meant to participate through their taxes of course.

They had a real army, the French one. And they even had a navy, the French one.

:-D
:-D

[The Comrade]

Lucky Luke wrote: I meant to participate through their taxes of course.

They had a real army, the French one. And they even had a navy, the French one.


the american during the french and indian war didn't have an army or a navy.


i have no idea where the hell you're getting these "facts" from.

[Lucky Luke]

The Comrade wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: I meant to participate through their taxes of course.

They had a real army, the French one. And they even had a navy, the French one.


the american during the french and indian war didn't have an army or a navy.


i have no idea where the hell you're getting these "facts" from.

I meant during the war of independence of course.

:-D
:-D

[The Comrade]

Lucky Luke wrote: I meant during the war of independence of course.

ahh.


the colonists had an army then. unfortunatly is was demoralized.


if it wasn't for the french at yorktown we never would have won.

[perdidochas]

lilwolf wrote: It was reported on NBC that the kid is mentally handicapped, so someone os going to get nailed for this.
Saw this on nightly news not 20 minutes ago.

The CNN article said he was special ed. This may or may not be "mentally handicapped" for the purposes of prosecution. It will make it hard to prosecute him as an adult, though.

[perdidochas]

britboy wrote: Wolverine wrote: britboy wrote: But surely if the 9th grader didn't have the gun, he'd just have killed the teacher using his textbooks, a pencil-case and a lump of mud he found outside?

:lol:

Criminals are criminals yea? Whatever happened the teacher was a dead man walking cos of this murderous 9th grader that would have found a way to end his life with or without guns yea?

:lol:

If you didn't laugh you'd cry.
What ever happened to gun free zones? I thought gun control was effective?

Off at a tangent again Wolverine?

Simple question -- do you believe without a gun this 9th grader would have killed the teacher anyway using a my-little-pony, a can of pepsi and a small rubber bottletop he'd found on the floor outside?

Well, according to the OP article, he had already thrown a stapler at another teacher. I think he would have escalated to a brick or a baseball bat, if he hadn't stolen the guns from the locked gun cabinet.

[perdidochas]

lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: Wolverine wrote: britboy wrote: Wolverine wrote: britboy wrote: But surely if the 9th grader didn't have the gun, he'd just have killed the teacher using his textbooks, a pencil-case and a lump of mud he found outside?

:lol:

Criminals are criminals yea? Whatever happened the teacher was a dead man walking cos of this murderous 9th grader that would have found a way to end his life with or without guns yea?

:lol:

If you didn't laugh you'd cry.
What ever happened to gun free zones? I thought gun control was effective?

Off at a tangent again Wolverine?

Simple question -- do you believe without a gun this 9th grader would have killed the teacher anyway using a my-little-pony, a can of pepsi and a small rubber bottletop he'd found on the floor outside?
Knives are sharp.

Answer my question brotboy.

My little pony could be fashined into a shank? yea? Or, er, you could prise the teachers eyes out using my little pony's head, then lead the teacher over a cliff to kill him yea?

Gun control is effective. Look at the UK. Our 9th graders can not get hold of guns - you know why -- because we don't have them to give to them.

I believe if the 9th grader didn't have a gun, the teacher would not have been shot. You probably disagree, why don't you tell me 'That kid was devious -- if someone hadn't given him a gun he'd have fashioned one out of toilet roll and alphabeti spagetti like they do off the A team and the teacher would be dead anyway'. :lol:

So you think, gun or not, the teacher was a dead man walking because of this criminal?? Can you answer? I dare you. I double dare you.


Added edit: If the kid was given the gun by his parents as a 'loving present' -- I don't think the parents can actually be charged with anything can they? You're society thinks .. '9th grader severely pissed off with the world? Perfectly reasonable for his parents to give him a loaded gun'. And you must agree I guess?

I would venture to say that the gun was not given to him. He is a special education student and there fore mentally handicapped. Do not lose sight of that aspect of this incident.

Special ed can mean a lot of different things. It could mean learning disability (which is not a mental handicap). It could mean a speech problem. Or it could mean mentally retarded or bhhavior disorder. IMHO, if special ed students are all viewed mentally handicapped, they shouldn't be allowed in schools with my sons (one of whom was once special ed--speech problem)

[lilwolf]

perdidochas wrote: lilwolf wrote: It was reported on NBC that the kid is mentally handicapped, so someone os going to get nailed for this.
Saw this on nightly news not 20 minutes ago.

The CNN article said he was special ed. This may or may not be "mentally handicapped" for the purposes of prosecution. It will make it hard to prosecute him as an adult, though.



Agreed, local TV and MSNBC said that he had mental difficulties so again that could cover a large area as well. But all in all it will be a hard case

[perdidochas]

Lucky Luke wrote: The Comrade let's see you answer this question now.


How many American lives are you willing to sacrifice a year, every year, year after year in order up to avoid gun control to become borderline unconstitutional?

:-D
:-D

I'd say up to about 15 per 100,000. Since we are at a little more than a third of that (a little under 6, per 100,000), let's leave things alone.