georgerussia

A classic example of quoting out of context by a quoter out of context. I wonder if anyone is surprised by that? PS. If that's all you can reply, your position must be very weak. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

It was very clear that me and Amazon were talking about guns, and not about reserve parachutes or telephones. You introduced them while jumping into our discussion and - as usual - started speculating about them. You even went as far as accusing ME to being "unable to keep up with the context of the discussion". Do you really know what "context" means? Do you really understand that context of this discussion was about guns, and not telephones or reserve parachutes? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

My point was that it is stupid to compare guns with seat belts just because both a gun and a seat belt can be used to protect their owner. An important difference is that guns can also be used (and have been used) to commit violent crimes, which is not the case for seat belts. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Really??? You want to point out where exactly we discussed telephones, seat belts and reserve parachutes in this thread before you introduced them a few posts ago? And you're saying it's me "unable to keep up with the context of the discussion"? This is just LAME. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I'm waiting for news reports when someone has been murdered with a seatbelt! Then we will count the numbers, and see what has been used more often to murder versus to save - a gun or a seatbelt. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I haven't needed one in 35 years, so I really doubt I'd need one in next 35. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

You are intentionally avoiding the most important aspect of why people want to restrict the gun ownership - that guns can be (and have been) used by some gun owners to harm other people really bad - much worse if they didn't have a gun. Tell me, how many people were murdered with fire extinguishers? Tell me, how many people were murdered with seat belts? Tell me, how many people were murdered with telephones? And how many people were murdered with reserve parachutes? Indeed, some of you gun owners have a very twisted way of thinking! * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

So let me make it straight. If I make up something like "perhaps maybe you should stop going to gay bars and truck stops looking for some homosexual encounters" is this fine with you because it uses the words "perhaps" and "maybe"? After all, it is not a direct attribution, but rather perhaps maybe more of a rhetorical question to make a point. Can you confirm this is indeed the case? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

SURPRISE - me neither. In fact I feel more safe than you - because I do not depend on a tool (which may fail) for that. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Did you ask them why YOU are mistaken and represent a cult? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Indeed, if a criminal had a gun we might have had a bunch of dead bodies instead. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This is strange as current N-400 explicitly asks: 16. Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason? So if you got a ticket (which required court appearance), doesn't it mean "cited"? If you got stopped by an officer, weren't you detained? Anyway, I was told I need to list those tickets which were dismissed in court (all of them so far have been), because it was still considered "arrested". Technically you'd have to list all the cases you were speeding (like driving 70 in a 65mph freeway - a crime), tailgating, or run a stop sign/red light. Maybe you used cell phone without hands-free, need to report it too. Of course if you ever bought weed or visited a hooker you'd have to list it too. There is a separate question in N-400 which explicitly asks if you worked for Nazi government, so this was a different case. This article says he was sent for treatment, and that by Federal law it should make him incapable to buy a gun. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This is only true if you base your 100% scale on the 2% rate. This is what is misleading. We already have our 100% scale. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This doesn't guarantee you wouldn't end up in the same situation. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

There is a significant different between using analogies and attributing them to the opponent. I assume you see the difference between "Perhaps a violent criminal likes murdering people" and "Perhaps JohnRich likes murdering people and would also like to murder our President". * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

VA Tech massacre is one of examples of those who were identified by nutters but were not accounted, and is a good indication why "so-many-existing-gun-laws" still need change. Federal law from 1968(!) already prohibited selling firearms to mentally defective. Cho was declared as "danger to himself" and sent for psychiatric treatment by the Virginia court, which should legally make him incapable to get a firearm. So technically everything should have worked? No; apparently VA state privacy law prohibited providing this information (about Cho mental state) to NICS, and therefore he was allowed to purchase a gun despite the safety checks allegedly being in place since 1968. This is interesting because getting a speeding ticket is considered by some immigration attorneys as being arrested (and released on notice to appear), and therefore it should be listed on N-400. Is it the case there too? (and N-400 has even funnier question - something like "have you committed a crime for which you have not been arrested?") * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Those 25 and 17 are not numbers, those are percentages already. You are taking percentages out of percentages, which is meaningless. It was made clear in the post above that those were percentages, but you somehow skipped this part in your quote - thus it can be considered an intentional lie. Welcome back. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Probably the same as YOU will do when a next Cho aims at your back and presses on the trigger. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

You have been told before by a moderator to stop making things up and attribute them to others. Doing it again? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Not here in CA or NYC. Still even in NYC we have significantly less violent crime than in Houston, TX. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

See, you can only "prove" your point if you go to heavy cherry-picking. Alexandria, VA: 140K people, 60% whites, 20% blacks. D.C: 600K people, 35% whites, 55% blacks. Now what about Baltimore, MD which have much closer population type and density to D.C. than Alexandria? No, I'm claiming they are the same across CA, and therefore your choice of Oakland instead of LA or SF is a cherry-picking - as usual. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I agree that is great news. Regarding storage there were some interesting projects - let's see how far they gonna made it. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

You could have just said that you're not going to answer my question instead of writing a bunch of rhetoric meaningless phrases. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Let's disprove your yet another false claim: 2008 UCR violent crime rates: Houston - 1,106.8 Detroit - 1,924.1 New Orleans - 1,019.4 Jacksonville - 996.4 Chicago - no data NYC- 580.3 Oakland - 1,968.4 So basically only one city you mentioned has a high violent crime rate - this, of course, is because you're cherry-picking. Los Angeles has 689.5, and San Francisco has 995.3, and the gun laws are pretty much the same there so it is obvious the difference is not related to different gun laws. Obviously one cherry-picked city out of whole state cannot prove your point. It is also worth noting that Oakland rate is pretty close to Tennesee (1,925.0) and is exceeded by St. Louis (2,072.7). * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This looks like a good start: http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/gun_show.shtml http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/dealer_firesales.shtml http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/mental-health.shtml http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/hr4900.shtml http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/closing_gun_gap.shtml * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *