Here's an idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

What part of that do you find problematic, Kev?

So it's undisputed that we do, in fact, provide arms to Mexican cartels.
And this is OK because China and Russian and pretty much anyone with an anvil- you know, all the cool kids- are doing it too.

Right.

---

Well, I took the small liberty of assuming the fact of the White House's stating that "90 percent of the cartels' weapons come from the US" was found to be wildly excessive (the actual figure is about 17 percent) might change the presumptions of liberal people such as yourself, given your normal reliance on "facts", but, since the actual facts are not the ones you prefer to use, I will say here that I cited the article for the consumption of people other than yourself, because it seems you think that 17 equals 90.

It's a brand of math I can't quite come to grips with, but hey.

---

!7% makes it right or better?
I read your what you write, I got to think that you are a retard or an idiot, sorry I can't find any other explanation, you are to much of a simple man to be a conservative.
I hope you find peace in your heart, because so far you don't make sence in any of you writings, maybe it is because you are divorced and can't find anyone to deal with you, so change your tune, women like men that have unlimited knowledge about everything. kisses to you, just try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

Thanks for responding with such a great example of conservative-think.
Which basically begins with a self-pitying tossing up of the hands- "What good will it do to disarm, when nobody else is doing it and only criminals will then be armed?"- and finishes with that well proven solution- "We'll invade with our military".

Had you somehow managed to include your belief in the innate goodness of corporations, you'd have a trifecta going on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AP

A man opened fire on officers during a domestic disturbance call Saturday morning, killing three of them, a police official said. Friends said he had been upset recently about losing his job and that he feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns.

---

Another great example of conservative-think.

---

A typical mis-reading of my post.

I say, attack the problem, with an eye toward a solution, you say, take our cards off the table but leave all of our chips in the pot, and feel good that we've assuaged our guilt while the cartels continue to kidnap and kill.

A great example of liberal non-think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lamuller

!7% makes it right or better?
I read your what you write, I got to think that you are a retard or an idiot, sorry I can't find any other explanation, you are to much of a simple man to be a conservative.

---

You read it?

You obviously don't understand it, and the reason you "can't find any other explanation" is due to your having been dropped on your head when you were young, perhaps by your drug-addled and fumble-fingered mother - I can only guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lamuller

I hope you find peace in your heart, because so far you don't make sence in any of you writings, maybe it is because you are divorced and can't find anyone to deal with you, so change your tune, women like men that have unlimited knowledge about everything. kisses to you, just try.

---

I have been divorced, but am re-married to a wonderful lady (you can confirm this with Clocker, if you like).

What would you about such things, anyway - aren't you gay?

Oh, and, to get back on point:

17% is better than 90%, in this case - if you'd care to argue otherwise, I'd love to hear it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

You read it?

You obviously don't understand it, and the reason you "can't find any other explanation" is due to your having been dropped on your head when you were young, perhaps by your drug-addled and fumble-fingered mother - I can only guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lamuller

I hope you find peace in your heart, because so far you don't make sence in any of you writings, maybe it is because you are divorced and can't find anyone to deal with you, so change your tune, women like men that have unlimited knowledge about everything. kisses to you, just try.

---

I have been divorced, but am re-married to a wonderful lady (you can confirm this with Clocker, if you like).

What would you about such things, anyway - aren't you gay?

Oh, and, to get back on point:

17% is better than 90%, in this case - if you'd care to argue otherwise, I'd love to hear it.

---

Oh baby, maybe you would like to talk to the spouses, to the kids to the families of the Pittsburgh, to the the one's in NY and tell them the guns that killed their families were friendly guns, maybe you want to tell them, that was God's fault or God's plan, who know, you may even tell them you are an idiot.
When you have something to prove, there is something wrong with that picture.
Clocker by the way is a very smart person, you wish you were half as smart as he is.
Is that wonderful lady a man with a huge d**K? I don't care anyway, other that you are a wacko, you are one of those that would get a gun and would kill anyone because God told you so.

kev, she found you out..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I say, attack the problem, with an eye toward a solution, you say, take our cards off the table but leave all of our chips in the pot, and feel good that we've assuaged our guilt while the cartels continue to kidnap and kill.

---

Attack the problem how, Kev?
Since restricting the flow of American arms- be it 90%, 17% or just 1%- is obviously off the table for you...just what did you have in mind?
More hand wringing and calls to action...applicable to other countries only?

I'm assuming your invasion talk was just an attempt at Cheneyesque humor.

@lamuller:
Indeed, I can and will confirm that j2 is married to a peach of a woman and he is one of the least likely to go on a religion-fueled shooting spree.
Cross him at 9-ball and all bets are off though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lamuller

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

You read it?

You obviously don't understand it, and the reason you "can't find any other explanation" is due to your having been dropped on your head when you were young, perhaps by your drug-addled and fumble-fingered mother - I can only guess.



I have been divorced, but am re-married to a wonderful lady (you can confirm this with Clocker, if you like).

What would you about such things, anyway - aren't you gay?

Oh, and, to get back on point:

17% is better than 90%, in this case - if you'd care to argue otherwise, I'd love to hear it.

---

Oh baby, maybe you would like to talk to the spouses, to the kids to the families of the Pittsburgh, to the the one's in NY and tell them the guns that killed their families were friendly guns, maybe you want to tell them, that was God's fault or God's plan, who know, you may even tell them you are an idiot.
When you have something to prove, there is something wrong with that picture.
Clocker by the way is a very smart person, you wish you were half as smart as he is.
Is that wonderful lady a man with a huge d**K? I don't care anyway, other that you are a wacko, you are one of those that would get a gun and would kill anyone because God told you so.

---

So, you are gay, then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I say, attack the problem, with an eye toward a solution, you say, take our cards off the table but leave all of our chips in the pot, and feel good that we've assuaged our guilt while the cartels continue to kidnap and kill.

---

Attack the problem how, Kev?
Since restricting the flow of American arms- be it 90%, 17% or just 1%- is obviously off the table for you...just what did you have in mind?
More hand wringing and calls to action...applicable to other countries only?

I'm assuming your invasion talk was just an attempt at Cheneyesque humor.

---

No, it's not off the table...just don't act as if subtracting our 17% is all that needs done.

We should have been minding our store all along, but without the balance dealt with, we're spinning our wheels, and merely doing what "feels good" doesn't cut it; take our 17% out of the equation, and nothing changes.

What then?

I never said that subtracting our contribution is all that needs doing.
(And BTW...your 17% number is just as suspect as the White House's 90% given that the majority of weapons were not tested for origin).

It's nice to see you admit that we "should have been minding the store all along"...why do you think we haven't?
What special interests benefit from our laxity?

Finally, remove our 17% (or whatever the real number might be) and the problem is reduced by 17%...hardly a "nothing" result.
At the very least, acting unilaterally removes the stigma of "do as I say, not as I do" when negotiating with other involved parties.

I have a problem with this phrase...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

Finally, remove our 17% (or whatever the real number might be) and the problem is reduced by 17%...hardly a "nothing" result.

---

...specifically, the "or whatever the real number might be" part.

If the "real" number were 90% (as was first ventured) and we removed it, it is very (very) safe to say the result would have been of commensurately greater dimension, and the very possibility of a 90% reduction would spur greater effort/effectiveness than would the 17% (or whatever the real number might be).

The lesson to be learned is downright Hitlerian:

A lie told in aid of an ostensibly virtuous cause becomes virtuous in it's turn.

I don't get your point.
90% of the weapons submitted for testing did come from America.

The fact that most of the confiscated firepower was not even submitted hardly diminishes our complicity.

Your resistance seems to mirror the official gun lobby meme that the problem is so overwhelming that nothing will have a meaningful effect, therefore, do nothing.
In fact, better than even trying to enforce existing laws or- God forbid- enact new ones, let's weaken the laws already in effect, so even more people can be armed.

This attitude is mirrored in your original post where you suggest that the world's problem is not too much weaponry but rather , too little...so let's spread it around even further.