165
Docs getting politically nosey : Swingers Discussion 217497101
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsDocs getting politically nosey
TOPIC: Docs getting politically nosey
Created by: norcalcouple100
Original Starting post for this thread:
For this to be valid they would be asking if the child is allowed to express themselves in the home

.ksl. com/index.php?nid=757&sid=24123834&fm=most_popular

if there are hammers in the home. if the child's parents had a permit for their hand and feet. if there are blunt instruments in the home. if there is a automobile that the parents allow their child to ride in. all of these things kill many, many, more more children every year than these evil looking black guns. and speaking of black. If they are going by the numbers and using the scientific methods of finding facts they should also ask if there is someone living in the home who is black. The numbers prove without question that blacks kill a much larger portion of their own population than any other group of people in this nation. there is no affirmative action in addition and subtraction.

BUT, if you want to actually stop these mass shootings then you should ask if there are any persons in the family of close to the family who suffer from mental illness.

and before this child walks out the door, if he is a black male, the doc who is actually telling the truth should have to inform the child and responsible parent that this child stands a ten times better chance of being murdered by another black than any other racial group in this country.

I hate racism but if these docs care about the provable truth and facts each and every one of these points has much more to do with gun violence and death in this country than assault weapons do. The well publicized numbers overwhelmingly support each one of these facts. I dare a doctor to tell the truth.

If I upset anyone I'm sorry. I do understand that people do not like being pointed out or vilified for something that is not illegal.

GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4
 1 to 10 of 35   End
User Details are only visible to members.
SS disability, SSI, Government employment, the military, law enforcement, being bonded, Flying, entering Government buildings, etc etc etc etc....ALL compel you to give up certain rights

Rosemont IL
Username hidden
(3842 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"There are many situations in which you can voluntarily waive your rights, and most are not gun related. "

yep, such as worker compensation or rather the ability to sue for damages which worker comp doesn't cover.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7366 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Outdoors...no it's really not scary There are many situations in which you can voluntarily waive your rights, and most are not gun related. No one forces anyone to get a C3 FFL...It's a choice

Rosemont IL
Username hidden
(3842 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
" Do you agree objects that cause death by blunt force trama are used to kill more people than people kill with all forms of rifiles? " ========

I don't know, because there's a sizable category of "firearms undetermined or uncategorized" deaths.

Nobody would agree that all blunt objects are "hammers". It's just easier to say, I guess. Never mind that it makes you sound stupid to confuse the terms.

I understand there are hundreds of different guns, maybe thousands, available. Each and every kind has been used in a certain number of deaths, and these numbers have nothing to do with how dangerous a single gun is.

You're more likely, statistically, to be in an auto accident within 50 miles of your home. Does this mean it's more dangerous to drive close to home, rather than far from home?

Flat Rock NC
Username hidden
(2984 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"People like you will have a list of everyone who has a C3. And have no knock ability to search .."

This IS scary!

Flat Rock NC
Username hidden
(2984 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Not yet? That is pretty open ended don't ya think? Has a flying saucer landed on the white house lawn? Not yet

Rosemont IL
Username hidden
(3842 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Have people with C3 FFLs had their weapons confiscated recently without cause?" Not yet....

Tulare CA
Username hidden
(1880 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"I want a class 3 FFL to own one." 1st step in confiscation and banning them. To get a C3, FFL you waver your 4A rights. People like you will have a list of everyone who has a C3. And have no knock ability to search

Really? Have people with C3 FFLs had their weapons confiscated recently without cause? The list of those with a C3 is already public record What's the problem?

Rosemont IL
Username hidden
(3842 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
From reviewing the conversation which has taken place here, I have come to the conclusion that;

A) the right feels any restriction on weapons is the beginnings of a ban. They have a point. B) the left feels that for a weapon of (x) fire power, one ought to be licensed to carry or own. They have a point.

Both sides have good arguments, both sides cancel each others arguments and nothing is done, unless the supporting arguments are studied.

Right:

1) more guns in the hands if responsible owners will lead to a more defended population. 2) when under siege by an enemy with superior fire power, you need superior fire power. 3) state rights vs federal law/control

Left:

1) no one is responsible until proven so and everyone must be re-tested often. 2) the average person isn't put under siege by persons with assault rifles and the average round from an assault rifle will penetrate the average home. Thus making the use of the assault weapon a threat to bystanders in any densely populated area. 3) because more liberals are living in the cities, travel between cities more often and generally have fewer freedoms to begin with as a result of our lifestyles, we do not feel that giving up control to a centeral government over a diverse fifty states government is a problem.

So far no one has obtained the surperior argument. We must study further.

Population densities control lawmakers.

If this is true, than the cities rule unchallenged. Obviouslly this this true as the gun issue would have been resolved by now. What is true about is is that over time, liberal leaning laws have become the standard rule of law.

As such, the above statement about population densities is in fact true, but occurs slowly.

From this study, one can conclude that the liberals will get their way. What the right must do is learn how to compermize, study where and why the greatest harm is caused by and fix it.

Cowboy mentalities won't fix this problem. Hard data will and arguing over hammers vs rifle statistics is pointless as the left isn't arguing actual damage, but protential damage of the weapon.

I wish there were better statistics for which type of weapons are used in murders. I believe that hand guns and other smaller weapons are used most often in murders which grip headlines rather than assault weapons. Most of the data is simply too superficial to conclude this with facts.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7366 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I see dumb ass is back

Berryville VA
Username hidden
(1750 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4
 1 to 10 of 35   End
TOPIC: Docs getting politically nosey