Why Should I Discuss it?

 Nobody said you Should.


Like I said
I don't CARE about magazine capacity. Just one more game,right?

 Or a discussion topic related to gun violence data.  Since I prefer to discuss the topic, I will see it as viable information.  The argument is sound from a numbers point of view.  It is unsound from an accessibility point of view.  



Lefties won't admit gun control Has Failed. It's never going to work. It didn't stop murders,it changed how they died. Until the left admit the obvious
Why would I bother with another argument?

 No idea, you choose to post, you are the only one that knows that answer.  My point was that when someone says they want fewer guns or lower capacity magazines, complaining about no-gun signage sounds like deflection since nobody said signs worked.  Nobody thinks no-gun signs stop shootings.  Typically in that argument the human won't admit that higher capacity magazines will allow a criminal to kill more people per-minute.  

 This thread further supports that assessment.



If The Obvious Truth escapes them, then anything less than obvious will never penetrate their skulls.
Go ahead,, play your
Let's Define gun control card..

 Defining what part of "gun control" is being discussed will help in a discussion because it is an expansive topic.  Saying no gun zones don't stop shootings should be a defense when a human actually says they do.  



Everything that is in opposition to Constitutional Carry is gun control.
IT'S STUPID and, while it violates the rights of the people,, it also fails to Do what The People are giving up FreeTime for.. It doesn't even make them safe.

 I mostly agree, however I do think that limiting some guns is a good idea.  After using the latest USMC replacement for the SAW, I can't imagine how much damage one human could do to a crowd of people with the drum extensions and exploding rounds.  I was able to cut a car in half, literally, in about 9-11 seconds.  The only thing that would reduce the carnage is barrel heat.

Eegore wrote on 07/19/24 at 14:09:46:

Yep.
Yet what the Fairy Dust Sprinkling anti Gun Socialists, do NOT realize.
  (Rather, REFUSE TO BELIEVE)
The CRIMINAL doesn't care one bit, if the law said, '...one can only have 10 rounds in a semi auto handgun..."

    The CRIMINAL,
          will do
WHATEVER THEY WANT !

While a Law abiding Citizen
will follow the law.

Nobody wants an experiment?

"Nobody wants an experiment?"

 Propose the parameters and volunteer to take part in both outcomes as anyone willing to run an experiment would certainly do.

Howzabout we pass laws that make having guns either very difficult or totally illegal in some places and very lax laws against guns, including No License, Open Carry in others and just SEE what happens??

JOG wrote on 07/19/24 at 20:43:01:

It stands on it's own if you ignore the first half of the sentence
That, is hardly standing on it's own
You have to parse the sentence to make it support your view


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Now it reads completely different

PS   I don't know how we got this topic from the question of Covid standing Biden down
I do think he's done
Prepare for chaos  

Quote:

What are you talking ABOUT ?

It is absolutely clear what the 2nd says.

(That is for intelligent people. Who can understand, 'GAY', once meant a very happy person, which know means something COMPLETELY different.  Is the SAME as something written when this part of the North America Content became a NATION. Some words, NOW, may have a different meaning than, THEN.  Doesn't mean the, THEN, is no longer valid)