To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *19201 (-20)
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) gun (...) Written August 11, 1998 (URL) January 6, 2003 (URL) course the actual statistics no longer appear to be available. Go figure. -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) you think that if more restrictions were put on ownership perhaps >less would be stolen? (...) I think you are agreeing with me? (...) It's a gun's ability to kill that makes ownership so attractive to many. Scott A (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) <snip> Is there stats on this? Without any veil of agenda, I'd like to know how many guns in the black market today come from off shore. Curious. Dave K (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) You're not very good at staying on thread, are you? Nor are you very good at paying attention. Go dig up the red light threads and reread them before you blather further. But assuming you won't, or won't be able to analyse what was said, for (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Please give up on the notion that gun supply can somehow be controlled. There will *always* be guns, whether they are stolen from my house or produced in a third world nation. Anyway, the whole issue will become moot when technology gives us (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) I just recalled that some gun hobbyists make their own ammo. Doesn't detract from the point--criminals are probably doing criminal activities and are not making their own (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Care to show cause and effect? I expect not! (...) Given that 500,000 are stolen from lawful owners each year in the USA. Do you think that if more restrictions were put on ownership perhaps less would be stolen? (...) Even in the UK, some (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Do criminals make their guns? Do they have gunsmithing shops in the back of their barns where they can make their .22's and ammo? Well, no. So where do the criminals get their guns? Well, I can think off the top of my head a variety of (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Can you give an independent citation for that statistic? And some kind of causitive confirmation that the crime rate increased *because* gun control was initiated? Otherwise, the argument must be abandoned as a post hoc interpretation. That (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) But I think the point that was made to you in response to that assertion is that it is a canard-- it will never happen, and so you really could never prove it anyway. But people have thought along those lines and tried to ban guns anyway. (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) That is because the crime rate in Canada and the UK and anywhere else you choose to examine has gone up (NOT down) after Gun Control policies were enacted. It is impossible to reduce the number of guns that criminals will get so long as guns (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Ahh, the American Cup-- All you need is 40 million dollars and a dream... ;) Dave K (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) HOG PILE!!! :-) (...) Ah, I have the perfect answer-- I started to watch but became so disgusted that I turned it off (and coincidently, that's what really happened) (...) lol My dad watches that too! "It's really fascinating, blah, blah, (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  no D-Day in '44? [was Re: Not in my name!]
 
(...) Churchill did say that the USSR "tore the guts out of the Nazi war machine". The USSR lost ~25-30,000,000 in WW2 [the USA lost ~140k in Europe]. Without the USSR, D-Day would never have happened in '44 as Germany would have had its best (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Yeah, that's the dreamer part of me... but it's completely true. (...) I like how you do away with the rest of the logically constructed arguement, that if you *reduce* the number of guns, you will reduce the number of gun related cases of (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) I missed Rather's interview--I think it was on during 'Enterprise' or 'The West Wing', not that I really bothered to check when it was on--I lumped it, mistakenly or not, in the 'Let's get ratings at any cost' group, and I don't seem to (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Okay, everyone agrees that Dan Rather is an idiot. Except me. Not that I have the answer: I wasn't idiotic enough to watch him in the first place. Perhaps I do have the answer. :-) -->Bruce<-- Okay, 'fess up: who was idiotic enough to declare (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Yeah I think we can all agree on that. -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Tell you what. I'll concede that... if you can *completely* eliminate guns from the surface of the earth, no one will be killed with guns any more, or at least not until the aliens come. But I'll ***only*** concede that in return for a (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
 
(...) Hit fudge hasn't killed anybody, that I recall-I could be wrong. Ask a father what he wants done to the criminal who had just raped and killed his daughter. Weak willed? I don't think so--I'm just glad that laws are supposedly made by rational (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR