arma virumque cano (et alia)
A 3 year old chambered a round? Did you catch what the cop said about keeping guns locked up and away from kids? Yet gun loons reject safe storage for guns.
We don't reject safe storage. We reject one-size-fits-all laws being imposed by Mikeb's kind.
Is that why your "side" gives no alternative? I asked the question yesterday about safe storage and go no response that had any details about what you guys consider safe storage.
What is your obsession with "side"? Are you denying that there are two broad groups here, those who support gun rights and those who oppose them? You don't take a stand, other than to fling poo, so it's impossible to know what side you're on. And the fact is that many times, I don't answer your comments because they're not worth bothering about.When it comes to safe storage, there are many approaches. Look up gun safes, cable locks, trigger locks, and so forth. Creative people can come up with other solutions such as the one we saw a while ago here. I recommend safe storage, but I don't insist on mandating it.
What is your obsession with "side?" I use it because you use it. I use it to point out how stupid it is. You claim the anti gun "side" does this, or that, but when I say the pro gun "side" does this, or that you call me a liar. When you claim the anti gun side all want to ban and confiscate guns, you lie. If you are going to falsely group all who disagree with you on one side (which is ridiculous) then it's fair to play that stupid game in reverse. I have said many times this "side" crap is just that, but you continue to use it. Then falsely accuse me of being part of that side, which I am not, so you lie again. There is no "side" to dead children from gun shots. Again, I have clearly stated my positions. The fact that you and SS claim different, is a lie. Prove it, as I prove you a liar and criminal with YOUR OWN WORDS. You answer my comments all the time even though I have asked you not to, another lie by you.
Greg, it's not "one-size-fits-all laws" that you reject. You reject any laws. And that makes you responsible for the results, partly. The half-a-million guns that are stolen EVERY year are just part of your pernicious results.
Mikeb, I am responsible for my own actions alone. Unless you want to say that my support of free speech makes me responsible for what other people say.Anonymous, you just admitted that there are two broad sides in this debate: one that supports gun rights and one that opposes them. Your side does want to disarm us all. My objection was to your constant use of quotation marks around the word. Your denials don't change anything.
I have explained many times, I put quotations around "side" because it is a ridiculous word YOU use to falsely categorize people and make false claims. Since you are an extremist you cannot possibly grasp a moderate viewpoint that accepts points of both "sides" and you prove that everyday in your ridiculous arguments. I don't accept the death of a child from a gun shot as being on either "side." You have clearly said the death of a (what you call few) is the price we pay for our rights. That's unacceptable, especially when many of those deaths could be averted with simple regulations that would not infringe on your right to own, buy, and use guns. Your irrationality is causing the death of innocents, and your constant insults prove you have little regard for people. So you get treated in the same manner, you deserve no less.
Anonymous, you are against rights. You waffle and weave, rather than making specific proposals. You spew insults. How you treat me is how I expect a vile person like you to treat me. The least you could do is be honest, but I know better than expecting that from a gun control advocate.
I don't agree with that Greg. You want to fight for and support lax gun laws which directly lead to unnecessary deaths, then you have to accept some of the responsibility for those deaths. You are responsible.