Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Yssup Rider · 12-31-2014, 11:55 AM

Rio -- Please read through some of these threads and associated ones before you start regurgitating last year's talking points. ThE hijack was bad enough, but to bring back the classic claw hammer argument is tedious for every one of us who've heard it in here a dozen times in threads that were actually about that subject.

Thanks in advance for protecting your family. Do they know your hero is IBIdiot?

rioseco · 12-31-2014, 02:55 PM

Yssup please go fuck yourself before you reply to me. I already informed you that I don't give a damn what you want.
How many times have we seen and heard the same old shit about scumbags attacking the Second Amendment ? That doesn't seem to bother you. What a waste of good breathing air you are. Again a race baiting, hypocritical liar is what you are.
Does your family know what a lump of feces you are ? Oh thats right, to keep up with the Jacksons, Washingtons and Franklins you opted to not know who your baby daddy was.

What are you going to think when your little underpriviledged buddies can't get a weapon to rob, rape, steal and kill with. Oh, I see now. Thats why you don't want the light shed on hammers and bats and such ! Fucking brilliant strategy boy !

You are the Champion Moran of the Clarksville Clavern of Dumb Fucks.

Yssup Rider · 12-31-2014, 03:21 PM

What in the world does this thread have to do with the second amendment?

While I can try to understand how frustrating it must be for you to try and keep things straight, it's really not necessary to resort to schoolyard potty talk and outbursts of anger.

Please start another thread on the second amendment and repost all the 2009 talking points you like.

But do yourself a favor, man up and avoid the continued ridicule.

rioseco · 12-31-2014, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

What in the world does this thread have to do with the second amendment?

While I can try to understand how frustrating it must be for you to try and keep things straight, it's really not necessary to resort to schoolyard potty talk and outbursts of anger.

Please start another thread on the second amendment and repost all the 2009 talking points you like.

But do yourself a favor, man up and avoid the continued ridicule.

Oh now Yssup #3 arrives to again dennounce "potty talk" You are so very easy, slut !
Look mental midget the thread is about a U.N. Treaty that restricts small arms in the U.S.A. How can you not be aware of that ?
Do us all a favor and get a fucking clue before calling others out for the same.

Yssup Rider · 12-31-2014, 05:38 PM

Read it again, dipshit.

rioseco · 12-31-2014, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Read it again, dipshit.

Go fuck yourself, you piece of shit.

Yssup Rider · 01-01-2015, 01:13 AM

Nice talk, rio.

SpeedRacerXXX · 01-01-2015, 07:44 AM

[QUOTE=rioseco;1056199216]This was a thread about the U.N. and evil enemies of freedom here in the U.S.A. trying to auction off our Second Amemndment freedoms cheaply.
Didn't hijack yout thread. I made some simple points about the many ways to die in America. Obviously the facts support that cars are more dangerous than guns.
Point extended and unrefutably.
I commend you for giving up driving to save lives.
I own guns to save lives, both mine and my family.
Different strokes for different folks they say..............
Have a nice day ![/QUOT

Let's see -- how many of the traffic deaths were homicides? Probably close to zero. Compared to 8-9,000 HOMICIDES by handgun in the U.S. You are comparing apples to oranges. Accidents happen and many laws have been passed to reduce the number of car accidents. What is being done to reduce the number of homicides by handgun?

You own guns to protect you and your family. Fine by me. No one here is trying to take that right away from you.

LexusLover · 01-01-2015, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

What in the world does this thread have to do with the second amendment?

Please everyone ... don't tell him.

I B Hankering · 01-01-2015, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Let's see -- how many of the traffic deaths were homicides? Probably close to zero. Compared to 8-9,000 HOMICIDES by handgun in the U.S. You are comparing apples to oranges. Accidents happen and many laws have been passed to reduce the number of car accidents. What is being done to reduce the number of homicides by handgun?

You own guns to protect you and your family. Fine by me. No one here is trying to take that right away from you.

Deaths resulting from DUI impaired drivers are homicides -- vehicular homicides, speedy.

LexusLover · 01-01-2015, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Let's see -- how many of the traffic deaths were homicides?

What is being done to reduce the number of homicides by handgun?

You own guns to protect you and your family.

Fine by me. No one here is trying to take that right away from you.

#1: There is no constitutional amendment protecting the RIGHT to drive a car or own one for that matter.
#2: Please don't rewrite history. The "right to bear" arms was not meant to protect one and one's family from burglars or robbers. The amendments of the Constitution were directed at Government violating those rights and privileges ..... and historically "the King" was collecting arms to prevent "armed" resistance against "the King." So the wise and knowledgeable framers did not want that to happen again ... under any pretense.....just like the other "protections" of the Constitution and the Amendments.

A firearm is inherently designed to cause serious bodily injury or death.

An automobile is not.

SpeedRacerXXX · 01-01-2015, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

#1: There is no constitutional amendment protecting the RIGHT to drive a car or own one for that matter.
#2: Please don't rewrite history. The "right to bear" arms was not meant to protect one and one's family from burglars or robbers. The amendments of the Constitution were directed at Government violating those rights and privileges ..... and historically "the King" was collecting arms to prevent "armed" resistance against "the King." So the wise and knowledgeable framers did not want that to happen again ... under any pretense.....just like the other "protections" of the Constitution and the Amendments.

A firearm is inherently designed to cause serious bodily injury or death.

An automobile is not.

Hmmm. You don't think many, if not most, gun rights advocates do not interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean ANY person has the right to carry ANY weapon, at ANY time, in ANY place? Supreme Court rulings (DC v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago) have determined that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for self-defense.

SpeedRacerXXX · 01-01-2015, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Deaths resulting from DUI impaired drivers are homicides -- vehicular homicides, speedy.

Vehicular homicide is, for the most part, unintentional. Homicides by handgun, for the most part, are intentional.

rioseco · 01-01-2015, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Please everyone ... don't tell him.

Not to worry,
............You can't fix stupid !

rioseco · 01-01-2015, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Vehicular homicide is, for the most part, unintentional. Homicides by handgun, for the most part, are intentional.

Apples to oranges ? Definetely not so.

Cars,bats,knives,hammers, bricks and firearms do not kill people. No matter how you would slice it up. No matter how you would segregate it. People kill people, either consciencely or accidentally it does not matter.

If we were trying to compare firearms,cancer and heart attack deaths then you would have legitimate apples and oranges defense. Stop the denial, accept it for what it is.