At least 27 die in school shooting in Connecticut | 1

[Zack Morris]

Another source for illegal guns appears to be gun manufacturers themselves, who 'lose' an average of 18 guns per day in the US. Mr. P might say this is just the cost of doing God's work

[Mr. Perfect]

Well, Mr. P, then perhaps you should explain to the Baltimore police what they're doing wrong because according to them, they aren't allowed to receive gun tracing data from the ATF beyond their jurisdiction, and only as part of a bona fide criminal investigation.

You are so cosmically ignorant. No one said you could trace guns if no crime had been committed. I have no idea how you've survived so far.

If a crime has been committed in America LE is authorized to track the ownership of the gun through the FFL system. I really think you don't understand what anyone is talking about. You are so ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Fi ... rd_keeping

Local law enforcement agencies don't have that information because of a federal blockage of gun tracing data. Police also can't reveal what gun tracing data they do have because a federal law passed a decade ago shields most firearm tracking information from the public.

Gun tracing information was public until 2003, when Congress passed what is known as the Tiahrt amendment. Named after former Kansas Rep. Todd Tiahrt, a Republican, the law limits what information is publicly available for research.

And I celebrate it. No guns should be traced at all unless a crime has been committed. Even then it doesn't seem to do much or prevent anything. States with high murder rates already have registries, it doesn't prevent anything.

Law enforcement agencies are also limited in what information they can maintain. The FBI is required to destroy background checks on gun buyers, and federal laws prohibit any national database that stores information on gun ownership, sales or manufacturing.

That's great. All of us already knew that Zack Morris. But any FFL is required to keep a registry that LE is is authorized to use once a crime has been committed. And of course one small change in the law and the Feds have a registry just waiting for them.

While you're at it, you might also want to explain to the Chicago chief of police that he is wrong when he says that gun transfers and losses do not have to be reported in Illinois. I'm sure a concerned citizen like yourself would be happy to set him straight.

The Police in Chicago reports to left wing politicians and a left wing public, and of course tells them what they want to hear. Of course Chicago already has the most gun control of almost any place in America. In Chicago by state law, city law or county law you already can't own an Assault Weapon, an oversize magazine, permits, licenses and registration is required, you have to have a "gun ownership" card, and you have to go through waiting periods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

I'm sure they just need one more law.

In the meantime, 9 of the 10 the states with the lowest murders by gun of all have virtually no gun laws. No registration, no bans (Assault Weapons, magazines, handguns) no permits, no waiting periods, nothing, nothing, nothing and they have the lowest rates of gun murder.

You are nearly completely ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_i ... s_by_state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violen ... s_by_state

Also, FFL reporting requirements only apply to -- wait for it -- FFLs! Which has nothing to do with individual gun owners.

Not only are you cosmically ignorant, but you are a slow learner.

On one hand you say the problem are these outlaw FFL dealers, who maintain a registry, and to combat this we need a registry (already have one, plus many states and cities keep their own registries) and we need to outlaw straw purchases (already outlawed). So your proposal is to do what we're already doing. Please think deeply on your overall position and life trajectory Zack Morris.


I think we can agree to a compromise here, I think you should be banned from owning a gun, owning a sharp object or any kind of machinery with a history of accidents. I'll settle on that.

[Mr. Perfect]

Another source for illegal guns appears to be gun manufacturers themselves, who 'lose' an average of 18 guns per day in the US. Mr. P might say this is just the cost of doing God's work

Wow. All those lost guns and they can only attach 1 crime to them.

No ones assesses risks better than you Zack Morris.

[Mr. Perfect]

Fast and Furious was a Bush program.

And...?

[Mr. Perfect]

Why? Because knives are commonly used on a daily basis for their intended purpose of preparing food, have been primarily used for that purpose for virtually all of recorded history,

And yet bows and arrows also have been used to obtain food for all of human history, and leftists want to ban those too, for their intended purpose.

Sometimes we need to "progress" Zack Morris, we need to visualize a knife free world.

are far less likely to be used in murders than guns,

Where?

are not usually designed to kill people,

Does that make a difference to someone killed with a knife Zack Morris?

cannot easily kill large numbers of people,

Knives can kill all of us.

and are much more difficult to injure innocent bystanders with.

That's true. Which is why you're afraid to go into the woods.

In places where guns have been outlawed, knife homicides have not displaced gun homicides,

How do you know that?

which alone is enough to render your argument preposterous.

Not so far.

[Mr. Perfect]

I believe the Democrats relinquished that logo in 2012

You think they would have.

No, it's more like blaming the Iraq War on Bush, despite Obama having inherited it. You should have familiarized yourself with basic analogies back in high school.

No it's like blaming Iraq on Clinton because Bush inherited the military.

[Zack Morris]

Well, Mr. P, then perhaps you should explain to the Baltimore police what they're doing wrong because according to them, they aren't allowed to receive gun tracing data from the ATF beyond their jurisdiction, and only as part of a bona fide criminal investigation.

You are so cosmically ignorant. No one said you could trace guns if no crime had been committed. I have no idea how you've survived so far.

Again, tell it to the Baltimore PD, because that's exactly what they are saying:

When reporters asked Baltimore police and state agencies where the guns used in city crimes came from, no one could provide specific information.

Gun traces are apparently not conducted frequently enough, prompting this memo from the Whitehouse to federal agencies.

If a crime has been committed in America LE is authorized to track the ownership of the gun through the FFL system. I really think you don't understand what anyone is talking about. You are so ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Fi ... rd_keeping

Poking around Wikipedia a little more might be to your benefit:

If a person purchases a firearm from a private individual who is not a licensed dealer, the purchaser is not required in most states to complete a Form 4473, though some states require individual sellers to sell through dealers.

Gee, I wonder how illegal handguns make their way into the hands of criminals??? Here's a thought: every gun owner and gun transaction ought to be registered, and improper transactions and lost guns should carry stiff penalties.

And I celebrate it. No guns should be traced at all unless a crime has been committed. Even then it doesn't seem to do much or prevent anything. States with high murder rates already have registries, it doesn't prevent anything.

It doesn't seem to do anything because of what I wrote above. 'Oops, I lost it' is an easy excuse. As is, 'I sold it to someone... legally, of course!'

The Police in Chicago reports to left wing politicians and a left wing public, and of course tells them what they want to hear. Of course Chicago already has the most gun control of almost any place in America. In Chicago by state law, city law or county law you already can't own an Assault Weapon, an oversize magazine, permits, licenses and registration is required, you have to have a "gun ownership" card, and you have to go through waiting periods.

That's an excellent start. Now we just need to nationalize this, otherwise guns will continue to flow into Chicago from all 50 states.

I think we can agree to a compromise here, I think you should be banned from owning a gun, owning a sharp object or any kind of machinery with a history of accidents. I'll settle on that.

Perhaps one of us should have our guns taken away. But I'm not the one running around with 90 rounds and an assault rifle every time I hear about teenagers lighting a bonfire.

[Mr. Perfect]

Again, tell it to the Baltimore PD, because that's exactly what they are saying:

Zack Morris, the Baltimore PD officiate over perhaps one of highest murder districts in the US and some the most restictive gun laws in the US, eg private handgun sales are prohibited and they keep a registry, and every transfer is recorded. They already have your laws Zack Morris.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Maryland

In the meantime, 9 of the 10 states with the lowest gun murders in the US have virtually no gun laws.

Why would I listen to the Baltimore PD about anything Zack Morris?

When reporters asked Baltimore police and state agencies where the guns used in city crimes came from, no one could provide specific information.

If Baltimire police aren't doing there jobs it's really not my problem. I don't live there. But this is a common theme in Democrat run cities. Where I live we don't have these problems.

Gun traces are apparently not conducted frequently enough, prompting this memo from the Whitehouse to federal agencies.

What is the appropriate number of gun traces Zack Morris?

Poking around Wikipedia a little more might be to your benefit:

If a person purchases a firearm from a private individual who is not a licensed dealer, the purchaser is not required in most states to complete a Form 4473, though some states require individual sellers to sell through dealers.

Gee, I wonder how illegal handguns make their way into the hands of criminals??? Here's a thought: every gun owner and gun transaction ought to be registered, and improper transactions and lost guns should carry stiff penalties.

I don't. The states with the 4473 provision have some of the highest crime rates Zack Morris. In fact the city of Baltimore does exactly what you propose here, the result is a very high gun crime rate. Back to the drawing board for you.

It doesn't seem to do anything because of what I wrote above. 'Oops, I lost it' is an easy excuse. As is, 'I sold it to someone... legally, of course!'

The City of Baltmore already has these laws Zack Morris. The result, very high rates of gun murder. Back to the drawing board.

That's an excellent start. Now we just need to nationalize this, otherwise guns will continue to flow into Chicago from all 50 states

But states that don't have these laws have very low rates of murder. In fact 9 of the 10 lowest have virtually no gun laws at all. So we'll pass. Thanks.

Perhaps one of us should have our guns taken away. But I'm not the one running around with 90 rounds and an assault rifle every time I hear about teenagers lighting a bonfire.

Who does that? I'm getting the sense that you think 90 rounds are not enough. Do you think maybe 120 to 150?

[Zack Morris]

In the meantime, 9 of the 10 states with the lowest gun murders in the US have virtually no gun laws.

Given that you subscribe to faith-based reasoning in other domains subject to rational inquiry, your ignorance here doesn't really surprise me anymore.

If Baltimire police aren't doing there jobs it's really not my problem. I don't live there. But this is a common theme in Democrat run cities. Where I live we don't have these problems.

I'm quite certain that your state has these problems.

I don't. The states with the 4473 provision have some of the highest crime rates Zack Morris.

It makes sense that states with the highest gun crime rates would implement such laws.

In fact the city of Baltimore does exactly what you propose here, the result is a very high gun crime rate. Back to the drawing board for you.

Correlation does not imply causation. Back to high school statistics for you.

But states that don't have these laws have very low rates of murder. In fact 9 of the 10 lowest have virtually no gun laws at all. So we'll pass. Thanks.

This is as silly as suggesting that Pakistan or Somalia would experience less civil warfare if only they were bigger arms exporters, like the US, France, and Sweden, which do not suffer from these problems and off-load their weapons elsewhere.

There isn't any evidence to suggest that gun proliferation lowers gun crime in urban areas. On the other hand, we know that gun crime predates restrictive gun laws, and that countries that have instituted nation-wide bans on weapons experience a drastic decrease in gun homicides.

You can only throw around correlations for so long before you're forced to analyze them, Mr. P.

Perhaps one of us should have our guns taken away. But I'm not the one running around with 90 rounds and an assault rifle every time I hear about teenagers lighting a bonfire.

Who does that? I'm getting the sense that you think 90 rounds are not enough. Do you think maybe 120 to 150?[/quote]

I think you should chill out. Nobody's out there in the woods waiting to get you. Except maybe one of your similarly crazy neighbors.

[Simple Minded]

Where do illegal guns come from, Mr. Perfect? Straw purchasers, followed by crooked dealers. Easily solvable problems.

Ya got me on this one Zack. Easily solvable? Care to provide an outline?

Do you mean easily solvable like Prohibition, the war on drugs, the war on poverty, sub-prime financing that makes housing affordable for all......

There are so many laws on the books are not enforced now, is it due to some magical lobby, or are the laws just too expensive to enforce? Watch how often the parent who creates too many rules for their children, falls back into the rationalization of "Well yeah, I know I said that.... but ya gotta pick your battles...."

The old line about "If it saves just one life, it is worth it!" is pure BS. Even though it is easily doable. Not hard at all to design a system that would make it impossible for a human to die in a plane or automobile crash. But no one would want to pay the airfare or buy the car.

I don't even know of a single parent who buys into that nonsense regarding even their own children when they are reponsible for the cost of implementation. No wonder the western nations are bankrupt.

CNC machining centers are pretty cheap. Even an illiterate can make a zip gun. And if Tinker is right about 3d printers, it is already too late to control the manufacture and distribution of contraband.

Everyone gun owner (or knife owner, or auto owner, or hammer owner, .....) has the equipment to become a potential killer, just like every woman has the equipment to become a potential hooker, and every man has the equipment to become a potential rapist.

What a strange culture, those who blame inanimate objects for human behavior, and attempt to indict and penalize people before they commit criminal acts pose as problem solvers. The desire to prevent future crime...... wow! Talk about a great sci-fi horror film.

The track record of the ideological administrators speaks for itself. Yet so many want more of the same. Can't blame the masters when everyone wants guranteed outcomes.

Life seems so just most of the time, maybe that is what really pisses so many people off.

[Zack Morris]

Do you mean easily solvable like Prohibition, the war on drugs, the war on poverty, sub-prime financing that makes housing affordable for all......

You got me, Simple Minded! Guns occupy the same place in society as alcohol and are exactly the same in all respects. No country has ever successfully prohibited the ownership of firearms without turning into a mafia state.

Not that outright prohibition is even being discussed. I guess stricter gun laws and enforcement of existing laws is going to lead to social chaos, though.

What a strange culture, those who blame inanimate objects for human behavior, and attempt to indict and penalize people before they commit criminal acts pose as problem solvers. The desire to prevent future crime...... wow! Talk about a great sci-fi horror film.

Actually, we blame the many deficiencies of American culture for producing so many violent people and seek to make gun possession as difficult as practically possible. You can misrepresent our viewpoint all you want but we will probably win this battle, just as we've wiped the floor with our opposition in every other Culture War standoff

[monster_gardener]

Well, Mr. P, then perhaps you should explain to the Baltimore police what they're doing wrong because according to them, they aren't allowed to receive gun tracing data from the ATF beyond their jurisdiction, and only as part of a bona fide criminal investigation.

You are so cosmically ignorant. No one said you could trace guns if no crime had been committed. I have no idea how you've survived so far.

Again, tell it to the Baltimore PD, because that's exactly what they are saying:

When reporters asked Baltimore police and state agencies where the guns used in city crimes came from, no one could provide specific information.

Gun traces are apparently not conducted frequently enough, prompting this memo from the Whitehouse to federal agencies.

If a crime has been committed in America LE is authorized to track the ownership of the gun through the FFL system. I really think you don't understand what anyone is talking about. You are so ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Fi ... rd_keeping

Poking around Wikipedia a little more might be to your benefit:

If a person purchases a firearm from a private individual who is not a licensed dealer, the purchaser is not required in most states to complete a Form 4473, though some states require individual sellers to sell through dealers.

Gee, I wonder how illegal handguns make their way into the hands of criminals??? Here's a thought: every gun owner and gun transaction ought to be registered, and improper transactions and lost guns should carry stiff penalties.

And I celebrate it. No guns should be traced at all unless a crime has been committed. Even then it doesn't seem to do much or prevent anything. States with high murder rates already have registries, it doesn't prevent anything.

It doesn't seem to do anything because of what I wrote above. 'Oops, I lost it' is an easy excuse. As is, 'I sold it to someone... legally, of course!'

The Police in Chicago reports to left wing politicians and a left wing public, and of course tells them what they want to hear. Of course Chicago already has the most gun control of almost any place in America. In Chicago by state law, city law or county law you already can't own an Assault Weapon, an oversize magazine, permits, licenses and registration is required, you have to have a "gun ownership" card, and you have to go through waiting periods.

That's an excellent start. Now we just need to nationalize this, otherwise guns will continue to flow into Chicago from all 50 states.

I think we can agree to a compromise here, I think you should be banned from owning a gun, owning a sharp object or any kind of machinery with a history of accidents. I'll settle on that.

Perhaps one of us should have our guns taken away. But I'm not the one running around with 90 rounds and an assault rifle every time I hear about teenagers lighting a bonfire.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Zack Morris.

and lost guns should carry stiff penalties.

Not enthusiastic about this idea but lets try it out at the Dept. of Justice first and prosecute those Fast and Furious Klowns perhaps starting* with our Ass of An Attorney General Eric Holder, IMO a criminal for whom I have the utmost contempt , who lost all those guns to Mexican Narcos which were then used to kill Mexicans and at least one American Law Enforcement officer....

The United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) ran a series of "gunwalking" sting operations[2][3] between 2006[4] and 2011.[2][5] These operations were done under the umbrella of Project Gunrunner, a project intended to stem the flow of firearms into Mexico by interdicting straw purchasers and gun traffickers within the United States.[6] "Gun walking" or "letting guns walk" was a tactic whereby the ATF "purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders."[7]

The stated goal of allowing these purchases was to continue to track the firearms as they were transferred to higher-level traffickers and key figures in Mexican cartels, with the expectation that this would lead to their arrests and the dismantling of the cartels.[7][8][9] The tactic was questioned during the operations by a number of people, including ATF field agents and cooperating licensed gun dealers.[10][11][12][13][14] During Operation Fast and Furious, by far the largest "gunwalking" probe, the ATF monitored the sale of over 2,000 firearms, of which only 700 were recovered as of October 20, 2011.[15] A number of straw purchasers have been arrested and indicted; however, as of October 2011, none of the targeted high-level cartel figures have been arrested.[7]

Guns tracked by the ATF have been found at crime scenes on both sides of the Mexico–United States border, and the scene of the death of at least one U.S. federal agent, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. The "gunwalking" operations became public in the aftermath of Terry's murder.[2] Dissenting ATF agents came forward to Congress in response.[16][17] According to Humberto Benítez Treviño, former Mexican Attorney General and chair of the justice committee in the Chamber of Deputies, related firearms have been found at numerous crime scenes in Mexico where at least 150 Mexican civilians were maimed and killed.[18] As investigations have continued, the operations have become increasingly controversial in both countries, and diplomatic relations have been damaged as a result.[2]

As a result of a dispute over the release of Justice Department documents related to the scandal, Attorney General Eric Holder became the first sitting member of the Cabinet of the United States to be held in criminal contempt of Congress on June 28, 2012.[19][20] Earlier that month, President Obama had invoked executive privilege for the first time in his presidency over the same documents.[21][22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

*Quite willing to have prosecutions work their way up to him too....

[Mr. Perfect]

Given that you subscribe to faith-based reasoning in other domains subject to rational inquiry, your ignorance here doesn't really surprise me anymore.

IOW I got you dead between the eyes.

Zack Morris, why is it that 9 of the 10 lowest murder rate states have virtually no gun laws? In your own words. And why did I have to teach it to you. Why did you not already know it.

I'm quite certain that your state has these problems.

Maybe, maybe not. My county, we don't have these problems.

It makes sense that states with the highest gun crime rates would implement such laws.

Why don't they work? Why do states with no laws have low murder? In your own words.

Correlation does not imply causation. Back to high school statistics for you.

WHOAH! Maybe you'll have to drop all of your material then. If correlation is not causation the case for gun laws evaporates, ie if I pass a law then people will follow it, or it will have an intended effect. That of course does not happen as w esee in Democrat cities and counties and states.

This is as silly as suggesting that Pakistan or Somalia would experience less civil warfare if only they were bigger arms exporters, like the US, France, and Sweden, which do not suffer from these problems and off-load their weapons elsewhere.

There isn't any evidence to suggest that gun proliferation lowers gun crime in urban areas. On the other hand, we know that gun crime predates restrictive gun laws, and that countries that have instituted nation-wide bans on weapons experience a drastic decrease in gun homicides.

There you go again with your correlation/causation arguments. Wonder why they don't work in the US? hmm.

Oh, and you're not even right. Harvard disagrees with you.

http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_g ... roductive/

You can only throw around correlations for so long before you're forced to analyze them, Mr. P.

You're right about that. 9 of 10 lowest states have the lowest murder rates. Most of the highest murder districts are all Democrat run and have the most gun laws. I think we can all put 2 + 2 = 4. You can keep your gun laws. Good luck to you.

I think you should chill out. Nobody's out there in the woods waiting to get you. Except maybe one of your similarly crazy neighbors.

I think you should learn about subjects before commenting on them.

[Mr. Perfect]

You got me, Simple Minded! Guns occupy the same place in society as alcohol and are exactly the same in all respects. No country has ever successfully prohibited the ownership of firearms without turning into a mafia state.

Not that outright prohibition is even being discussed. I guess stricter gun laws and enforcement of existing laws is going to lead to social chaos, though.

Lead? It's already here (California, Chicago, Baltimore, etc). No shortage of social chaos.

Actually, we blame the many deficiencies of American culture for producing so many violent people and seek to make gun possession as difficult as practically possible.

That's why we need guns, to protect ourselves from the monsters your culture has created. And that's why we'll keep them for that reason.

You can misrepresent our viewpoint all you want

You sort of have the trademark on that one.

but we will probably win this battle, just as we've wiped the floor with our opposition in every other Culture War standoff

You've already won the war in Democrat areas. Most of the laws you argue for are already on the books in Democrat areas and the result is dead minorities everywhere you look. Congrats.

[monster_gardener]

But Why not apply this idea to knives which are also notorious for their use as murder weapons and can be more deadly than guns within ~15 to 20 ft. per Mythbusters

Why? Because knives are commonly used on a daily basis for their intended purpose of preparing food, have been primarily used for that purpose for virtually all of recorded history, are far less likely to be used in murders than guns, are not usually designed to kill people, cannot easily kill large numbers of people, and are much more difficult to injure innocent bystanders with. In places where guns have been outlawed, knife homicides have not displaced gun homicides, which alone is enough to render your argument preposterous.

Thank You Very MUCH for your Reply, Zack Morris.

preposterous.

That was the idea...........

My apologies for not using "/Sarcasm On...... /Irony On......... etc....

Preposterous is what I hope this proposed Ukase remains..........

BTW bans on knives go back at least as far as when the Palestinian Philistines prohibited them to the Ancient Israelis

[Zack Morris]

That's why we need guns, to protect ourselves from the monsters your culture has created. And that's why we'll keep them for that reason.

Actually, it is your culture that created them. It's a culture of greed, insularity, and closed-mindedness. A culture hostile to education. A culture that sneers at intellectual achievement. A culture that glorifies mindless consumerism. A culture of superficial theatrics.

You've already won the war in Democrat areas. Most of the laws you argue for are already on the books in Democrat areas and the result is dead minorities everywhere you look. Congrats.

This is mostly the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, and in the Pacific Northwest, discriminatory housing practices. Interestingly, minority immigrants that have arrived in recent decades have flocked to "Democrat areas" and thrive. Many do even better than the "native" white population, and yet they still vote Democratic. These people are clearly smart enough to know what they're voting for.

As a child of immigrants myself, I can tell you that many of us have come in contact with "your" America, its petty, small-minded ignorance, and have come to strongly dislike it. Thankfully, you are not the majority. The America that matters welcomes us and is embarrassed by you.

[Mr. Perfect]

Actually, it is your culture that created them. It's a culture of greed, insularity, and closed-mindedness. A culture hostile to education. A culture that sneers at intellectual achievement. A culture that glorifies mindless consumerism. A culture of superficial theatrics.

I did not know those were adopted in Democrat cites and counties and states. Places like Baltimore, Chicago and especially California. I thought those places rejected conservative values for liberal tolerance. By the voting records those places hate Republicans and embrace Democrats and those places are a reflection of those values.

This is mostly the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow,

I've always said, Democrats are terrible for minorities.

Tell me though, how does slavery and Jim Crow apply to California, and Chicago, where none of that existed?

and in the Pacific Northwest, discriminatory housing practices. Interestingly, minority immigrants that have arrived in recent decades have flocked to "Democrat areas" and thrive. Many do even better than the "native" white population, and yet they still vote Democratic. These people are clearly smart enough to know what they're voting for.

Sure, an area of the country built on forest rape, heavy capitalist industry, and wild west internet/tech corporate capitalism no better example of liberalism that I can think of. I think you are in your finest moment Zack Morris.

As a child of immigrants myself, I can tell you that many of us have come in contact with "your" America, its petty, small-minded ignorance, and have come to strongly dislike it. Thankfully, you are not the majority. The America that matters welcomes us and is embarrassed by you.

Well the ignorance market has been cornered by yourself in this conversation Zack Morris, and it has cost you as always. You knew like virtually nothing about the topic! That is pretty hard to pull off, to know absolutely nothing about a topic.

It's been hilarious to watch. What it is you do know and are educated in hopefully will be revealed some time soon. It clearly isn't finance, economic, politics, current events, firearms, laws, crime statistics, and so forth. Hopefully some day soon we'll learn what you know about.

And I agree, my part of the culture is not the majority. The majority of the country has embraced national bankruptcy and suicide. Congratulations.

And the margins didn't come from the immigrants you prefer, they came from people you do not even consider your own and appear to view as subhuman, that is blacks and hispanics. You couldn't do it without them. And as reward you leave them in high crime ghettos with no chance of escape.

You iz some wicked @$$ people Zack, every time I think I've plumbed the depths I find that you guys are capable of so much more than I was aware of. Do your worst, people seem to like it.

[Zack Morris]

I did not know those were adopted in Democrat cites and counties and states. Places like Baltimore, Chicago and especially California. I thought those places rejected conservative values for liberal tolerance. By the voting records those places hate Republicans and embrace Democrats and those places are a reflection of those values.

They are, sadly, adopted by people everywhere who then end up struggling and wondering why. But a guy you might like, Charles Murray, would be happy to assure you that so-called 'liberals' have not adopted those values and are thriving while Fishtown, USA circles the drain.

Tell me though, how does slavery and Jim Crow apply to California, and Chicago, where none of that existed?

Racial discrimination wasn't a problem in Chicago's history? That's news to me. I'm curious as to how you can think the opposite though -- that centuries of slavery would have no effect on African Americans. But ignorance is your trade, not mine.

Sure, an area of the country built on forest rape, heavy capitalist industry, and wild west internet/tech corporate capitalism no better example of liberalism that I can think of. I think you are in your finest moment Zack Morris.

It shouldn't be a coincidence that most of the Pacific NW is deeply conservative. I mean, come on, roadside prayer shacks? That's the kind of thing you see the deepest darkest of eastern Europe or something.

It's been hilarious to watch. What it is you do know and are educated in hopefully will be revealed some time soon. It clearly isn't finance, economic, politics, current events, firearms, laws, crime statistics, and so forth. Hopefully some day soon we'll learn what you know about.

Many of us are asking the same about you I think you have one of the lowest citation/link-to-word ratios of any member here.

And the margins didn't come from the immigrants you prefer, they came from people you do not even consider your own and appear to view as subhuman, that is blacks and hispanics. You couldn't do it without them. And as reward you leave them in high crime ghettos with no chance of escape.

More ignorant blather. We're not the ones running away from these people or raising a ruckus when an affordable housing development moves into our suburban white picket fence neighborhood. That's what happens in the burbs.

[Mr. Perfect]

They are, sadly, adopted by people everywhere who then end up struggling and wondering why. But a guy you might like, Charles Murray, would be happy to assure you that so-called 'liberals' have not adopted those values and are thriving while Fishtown, USA circles the drain.

So the liberal strongholds like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore and California are thriving? That's your definition of thriving Zack Morris?

Racial discrimination wasn't a problem in Chicago's history? That's news to me. I'm curious as to how you can think the opposite though -- that centuries of slavery would have no effect on African Americans. But ignorance is your trade, not mine.

So again slavery and Jim Crow did not exist in California or Chicago, despite the fact that you directly cited slavery and Jim Crow as causes to these problems in places like IL and CA. Your explanation for problems for certain things in certain areas actually did not occur in those areas.

Why would you do that Zack Morris?

Why would liberals in places like Baltimore, California and Illinois treat colored people so badly?

Why did blacks do worse under Obama than any other group? What do you have against black people Zack Morris?

I have some answers if you can't think of any.

It shouldn't be a coincidence that most of the Pacific NW is deeply conservative. I mean, come on, roadside prayer shacks? That's the kind of thing you see the deepest darkest of eastern Europe or something.

I haven't got any idea what you are talking about.

But I am still laughing, out loud, that you would hold up a region based on forest rape, heavy industry and wild west tech corproate capitalism as some sort of grand liberal example. I laugh.

Many of us are asking the same about you

Not really. You got humiliated Farcus style.

I think you have one of the lowest citation/link-to-word ratios of any member here.

I think you should invest a lot of time to establish that. Put a lot of time into it.

More ignorant blather. We're not the ones running away from these people

You sure are. In this Seattle you love white people run from Rainier Avenue/MLK Way IIRC. Run from it.

The fact is the minority communities have been the ward of liberal democrats for a couple of generations, and they have been destroyed, and none of you care whatsoever.

or raising a ruckus when an affordable housing development moves into our suburban white picket fence neighborhood. That's what happens in the burbs.

On HBO drama shows I'm sure it's all over the place.

[Zack Morris]

So the liberal strongholds like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore and California are thriving? That's your definition of thriving Zack Morris?

Liberals, anywhere they exist, are thriving.

So again slavery and Jim Crow did not exist in California or Chicago, despite the fact that you directly cited slavery and Jim Crow as causes to these problems in places like IL and CA. Your explanation for problems for certain things in certain areas actually did not occur in those areas.

Clearly, you are neither a historian, and anthropologist, nor a sociologist. But you could try your hand at writing motivational pamphlets. You can start with this one, free of royalties: "Chin up! Nothing that happened in the past can possibly affect me!"

Why would liberals in places like Baltimore, California and Illinois treat colored people so badly?

Just spit it out already. You mean to say: "Black people are treating themselves badly because they're too stupid to know otherwise."

Why did blacks do worse under Obama than any other group? What do you have against black people Zack Morris?

Can you remember a time when blacks did as good or better than any other group in this country? What does this country -- what does your culture -- have against black people? Wasn't a few centuries of slavery bad enough? Must you keep persecuting them?

I haven't got any idea what you are talking about.

You must not leave the compound very often. I've seen them on Highway 2. Freaked the hell out of me!

EDIT: Here is an example. A part of me wonders if a road side mosque would be allowed but I'd rather not have my scenic drives ruined by any kitschy religious structures.

But I am still laughing, out loud, that you would hold up a region based on forest rape, heavy industry and wild west tech corproate capitalism as some sort of grand liberal example. I laugh.

I never held it up as a "grand liberal example". But it is generally acknowledged that the Seattle-Redmond area is blue territory. Just beyond their city limits is hopelessness, despair, wailing and grinding of teeth.

You sure are. In this Seattle you love white people run from Rainier Avenue/MLK Way IIRC. Run from it.

A few blocks from Rainier Avenue is some pretty primo real estate, Mr. P. It's inhabited by some real liberal types. Lawyers, German-born UW professors and their real estate mogul Vietnamese girlfriends, Amazon employees, self-employed accountants who moved there from Belltown. Living a few blocks from black people (and not in gated communities) doesn't seem to bother them. But it bothers you so much that you live in the godforsaken woods, where things are so dangerous you have to run around in the dead of night with a loaded M4. And all for what? To get away from the blacks? For shame!

The fact is the minority communities have been the ward of liberal democrats for a couple of generations, and they have been destroyed, and none of you care whatsoever.

They've been the ward of 'liberal democrats' because teabagger Republicans don't dare dwell there.

On HBO drama shows I'm sure it's all over the place.

No, I grew up in a swing state that leans ever so slightly Republican (certainly my part of it tilted that way). It was a state that suffered hard from the real estate bust. Prior to that, lots of Californians moved in from places like the OC, snapping up cheap real estate. You would have liked them. A huge suburban development went up in the late 90's and after a few years, some low income apartments were plopped down right in the middle of it (they were nice looking apartments, though). All those Mexicans had to be housed somewhere you know, so why not near the people they work for? When the residents found out who would be moving in next door, boy did their political colors shine through on their fat faces.

The development was not successfully halted, thankfully, and now all seems well. The neighborhood didn't turn into a war zone after all.

Moral of the story: go move to Belltown or MLK way. You might be pleasantly surprised at the fun you'll have there.

[Typhoon]

This thread has now exceeded the 50 page limit and is now locked.

Please continue the guns in the USA debate in the new thread: At least 27 die in school shooting in Connecticut | 2