Let's see your supporting evidence.

Honestly yes. Also people fail to take population into consideration. For one all the countries listed as higher than the US have a much smaller population as do the ones that are near the US in the list. Not condoning it just saying that all the facts haven't been represented

@LovinLarge The majority of gun-related deaths in the U.S. were self-inflicted according to the CDC.

61.48% suicide
35.12% homicide
1.15% unintentional
1.36% legal intervention
0.89% undetermined intent
[efsgv.org]
Mar 24, 2021

@Alienbeing The website mentioned doesn't take me to the statistics cited and your stats don't support the factual allegations made in his comment.

@LovinLarge Funny, I found it there, I guess you have a reading problem

@LovinLarge having totally blown her argument has decided to bow out by blocking, therefore erasing her incorrect statements,

@Alienbeing shes done the same to me. very sensitive soul

@Alienbeing Excuse me, BUT going by the Statistics you posted that MUST them mean that those VICTIMS from MASS Murders, a.k.a Shootings, at Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum WERE, in FACT, either of Suicides, Unintentional /Accidental Shootings or " Undetermined Intents " then?
BUT, by means, ACTUAL Homicides in any way shape nor form?
Jeez Louise, has ANYONE bothered to INFORM the Grieving Relatives and Friends of those numerous VICTIMS that their losses were ONLY purely ACCIDENTAL in Nature, etc, etc?

@Triphid appeal to emotion. So punish law-abiding citizens by making it harder for them to arm themselves and the criminals will get guns anyways. My sympathies for the victims of gun violence but making policy that it is antithetical to constitution will solve nothing

Are you saying that suicidal people aren't important? Guns make suicide incredibly easy for those acting on impulse. Of course people who are serious about suicide will find an alternative way, but they are forced to hesitate as they contemplate what course to take. This hesitation might cause some to reconsider.

@Heavykevy1985 Well, Gun Control HAS and IS WORKING here in Australia, in case you've NOT noticed.
Yes, you have an Amendment that says YOU may own and carry a gun in Public IF you so desire, am I correct in that assessment?
BUT, WHERE is the Constitutional Amendment that GIVES those who neither desire/want to own/carry a gun the RIGHT NOT to become TARGET PRACTISE for those who own/carry guns?
So, according to you, as I seem to perceive, it IS quite Constitutionally ETHICAL for someone to shoot another person BECAUSE it IS their right to have/own and use the gun they are carrying?
HOWEVER, and according to your comment, IT IS UNETHICAL/Anti-Ethical by the Constitution for Innocent Peoples NOT to desire to be Shot by those whom are merely exercising their 'ETHICAL' and Constitutionally GIVEN Right to do so?

@MsDemeanour ALL lives, imo, MATTER, any DEATH whether by Suicide, Accident or wanton Murder, etc, matters.
I.e. Even ONE DEATH by a gun is, imo, ONE Death too many.
That IS just ONE of the MANY, MANY Reason why I first became both a Crisis Counsellor and a Psychologist as well.

@Triphid yes i was just responding to people above who are minimising the stats by saying most shootings are suicide. I mean.....SO What? Someone is still being put to death. And it's still illegal I believe.

@Triphid I don't follow your math. Help me with it.

@Tejas Sensitive or intellectually dishonest?

@Alienbeing My maths?
I do it the same as everyone else does, i.e. 1+1=2, 1x1=1, 1-1=0 and so on and so forth.
It is NOT all that hard/difficult btw.

@Triphid Funny wise guy. I am positive I forgot more about math than you ever learned. You know I was not referring to addition and subtraction. Be a wise guy, and so be ignored.

@Alienbeing Okay, so you 'claim ' to be better at Mathematical Calculations than me do you?
So, show me how you can calculate the Wavelength of a Radio Signal just by using the Frequency and the Speed of Light in metric measurements.
In other words, either Put up or Shut up.

@Triphid Note, I said you are ignored, except for me to say your attempt to change the subject is pityful.

@Alienbeing Hmm, IF I were to given a Dime would it help to get you to call someone who MAY just care?

@Triphid Aparently you love being ignored. Perhaps if you knew your subject soeone may pay attention.

@Alienbeing Out of curiosity here, Alienbeing is your Screen Name, so did YOU emigrate to Earth from somewhere in the Galaxy or perhaps from closer, Ur Anus for example?

@Triphid Yawn

@Alienbeing Breathe deep, swallow all the oxygen the rest of the Intelligent people cherish and require to be able to actually think, go on be yourself.

@Triphid You never changed

@Alienbeing Been doing a Peeping Tom act around my neighbourhood have you?
Sorryto 'burst' your bubble here, BUT I changed my clothes when I got out bed this morning, did you by any chance?

@Triphid Yawn

@Alienbeing Honestly, is THAT the best you've got? a YAWN FFS.

@Triphid total strawman of any point I made.

@MsDemeanour matters not what you believe. Facts do not care about your feelings.

@Triphid rights also come with personal responsibility. So should we ban cars because a maniac has the potential to mow down civilians on the sidewalk? How about cigarettes? Tobacco kills over 400,000 Americans a year? How about fatty food? Heart disease kills 2,000,000 Americans a year. Do you really want to go down this path of “safety?” By the way, I could give a flying fuck about Australia’s gun control. Would not work here.

@Triphid YAWN does capsulate the interest your post inspire.

If you ever want to sound half way intelligent read up on the Bill of Rights, which includes the Second Amendment. You will find you knew nothing about the subject.

@Alienbeing It TOOK YOU almost 24 hours to come with this reply/response.
Why is that I ask, did you need to return to the 'Mothership' to consult with the Great Leader or something?
Precisely WHICH "Bill of Rights " are you attempting to refer to here?
Is it the United Nations Bill of Human Rights to which the U.S. is a Co-signatory Nation?
The Constitution of the United States of America, which, btw, ONLY Legally and Legitimately APLLIES ONLY on American soil.
Or are you attempting to bring the Constitution/s of other Westernised Countries into the discussion as well?

@Heavykevy1985 Well just maybe it WOULD work IF Americans were NOT so obsessed with, imo, A) owning/carrying Firearms, such as Automatic/Semi-Automatic Pistols, Assault style Rifles, etc, etc,, B) so bloody Paranoid that they seem to think/believe that behind or within every stranger they see MAY be a person who wants to Invade their country, C) MUST use violence to as a solution to almost EVERY Problem, and, D) the ideology of, imo, " I do because the Constitution says I can."
Just ask yourself "Exactly how many young and possibly very productive lives have been LOST to Gun Crimes like Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc, etc, over the last 10 or more years in the U.S., lives that have completely WASTED for NO real reason at all?"

@Heavykevy1985 " Strawman, " you say.
Well, IF that be so, then how do YOU think the Families, Friends and Relatives of ALL those victims feel about this " Strawman concept YOU are putting across then?
Fyi, I know ONLY too bloody well exactly what it feels like to be shot some idiot with a firearm.
In August, 1978, I was seconded, along with 2 others, to assist local Police in a Raid on a house where an illegal Drug, known colloquially as " Angel Tears," was being manufactured.
It was ASSUMED at the time that the ONLY occupant of the house was the manufacturer, BUT the assumption was 100% WRONG, his young son was there, playing in a corner of the backyard when the Raid started in earnest.
The Manufacturer burst out of the back door, the young son ran down from where he was playing and the father aimed his 32 calibre revolver at his son and shouted, " Fuck off you Pig Bastards or I'll blow the kid's head off."
Against orders, I ran out from cover, shield the boy using my body, threw us both to the ground and copped 3 bullets for my efforts.
2 bullets to my abdomen, one of which TORE through my large Bowel approx. 4 inches above my Genital region, the other punctured my small Bowel and 1 through my right shin.
It was calculated, after a 6 and a half Operation, that I had LOST approx. 50% of my body's Blood Volume between the Shooting site and the Hospital, another 1.5 litres during the operations to re-join my intestines RATHER than needing to spend the REST of my life wearing a Colostomy Bag ( DEFINITELY NOT a FUN thing to have and wear btw).
I can STILL recall and remember quite vividly the burning, painful sensations as the home-made bullets TORE through my body.
THAT, my friend, is EXACTLY what almost EVERY shooting victim feels IF they are NOT killed instantly btw.

@Triphid again, another fallacy. Appeal to emotion.

@Triphid I don't work on a schedule to respond to you. As amusing as your absurd/childish replies are, I do have other things to do.

OBVIOUSLY (expect to the very slow) my reference to the Bill of Rights was to the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. I even noted the Second Amendment, which was part of ost previous discussion.

Your rant about the applicability of the Bill of Rights shows you can't stay on subject.... the subject YOU started. I your reply you illustrated a new level of ignorance. Please continue with your replies, they are so rediculous they give me a good laugh, and laughing is good.

@Heavykevy1985 Most DEFINITELY NOT a Fallacy by any means since I have a 6 inch long scar from navel to pubes PLUS one 4 inches in length running along the right hand side of my abdomen as well and very visible hole shaped scar about 3 inches below my right knee as well.
IF you really need PROOF then I will try to photograph them and post them just for you.

@Alienbeing Ah, back for more again I see.
Nothing I like better on a dull day than seeing Glutton for Punishment lining up, ready for seconds or even thirds.

@Triphid it is a fallacy: appeal to emotion. Sorry for what happened to you but anecdotal evidence is not the basis of any kind of fundamental change to our constitution. Please stop lecturing me as an American how we should give up our guns. While you relay on hopes and prayers to protect you, I will take my 9mm

@Triphid You are truly delusional.

"Back for more"? Yes I came back to again see you continue to make a fool of yourself.

If you ever figure out why the Second Amendment was made part of the Bill of Rights, let me know. I won't wait up because I know you honor your ignorance.

I must leave now to go buy 20 or 30 more guns.

@Triphid, @Heavykevy1985 Unfortunately, Triphid has no clue, and worse yet, has no desire to get a clue.

@Heavykevy1985 I rely upon the the Laws Enacted by our Australian Government to do their best to protect ALL Australian Citizens and most DEFINITELY NOT Hopes and Prayers as you seem to be implying since I AM an Atheist, have been Atheist since LONG, LONG, BEFORE you stopped sucking your thumb, your mothers breasts, pissing your pants and your bed.
Most likely, at the time you were being pushed out through your mothers vagina and in to this world, I was working a 40 hour week, on a Roster system that required 3 shifts per day, Afternoon, Night and Day shifts, inspecting in-coming Freight Trains, then walking around them and doing repairs, brake adjustments, etc, etc, then walking around them once again AFTER the Locomotives were re-attached to check that ALL the brake systems were working first and the releasing so the Train could continue on to its next Destination.
That, fyi, meant doing a 2 kilometre Round Trip 3 times for EVERY Train that arrived and left, carrying approx. 3-5 kilograms of tools as well each time.
Some shifts we'd have between 4 and 6 Trains per shift arrive and leave with ONLY person to to do the whole lot.

@Alienbeing Since, atm, the ONLY TRUE Fool I see here IS you, and possibly ONE other, then as the wise old saying goes, Why should I stop or try to stop a Fool making an even BIGGER Fool of himself by assisting him in doing so?"
Ergo, I intend to Block you permanently asap.

@Triphid exactly. Hopes and prayers. Instead of worshiping Yahweh, you worship the state. The 2nd Amendment in the constitution allows for private citizens to form militias and bear arms to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. You know why the Japanese did not try a full-scale invasion of the US? Because mainly, Americans have the right to bear arms.

@Heavykevy1985, @Triphid The Second Amendment has nothing to do with allowing people to form private militias. Nothing in the Second Amendment grants such authority.

The Second Amendment does allow individuals, militias or not to keep and bear arms.

Since the Second Amendment is in the Constitution, chances of overturning it are slim. Amending the Constitution is very difficult, and the 66% State ratification, ceertainly would never happen.

The last sentence of your post is absolutly wrong. I dare you to cite a source.

People concerned about gun control (who include me) need to concentrate on the fact that the Constitution does not say ownership cannot be regulated. Things like much better background checks, longer waiting periods, and renewal license requirements would work.

Making it up as you go along does not.

@Alienbeing if you are referring to me, I never said anything about private militias. I was referring to private citizens being able to form militias. These are citizen militias. Again, if you are referring to Triphid, I think that I am blocked. I never was insulting or crass. I was merely stating facts and my opinion on thing. I think that he tapped out and blocked us

@Heavykevy1985 I don't understand the difference between a "private militia" and "private citizens being able to form militias".

If Triphid is gone, no loss.

@Alienbeing it means the people of a community coming together for its defense. Think of the Massachusetts Minutemen. Today, you have groups like the Michigan Militia or the people who fought off the government at the Bundy Ranch

@Heavykevy1985 OK, I see your point.

I find it laughable to note that @Triphid blocked you , me and the entire conversation after he repeatedly boasted he would never block because he so much enjoyed making fools of everyone else. I suspect he finally realized he did not, and could not justify a word he said.

@Triphid Seems you changed your mind.

Here is an article posted to FB which says the answer to higher gun deaths is easily explainable.
[vox.com]

With Utter and complete Buffoons running the country, imo, what more can one expect from the United States of Absurdity?

Let's see your supporting evidence.

@LovinLarge
[worldpopulationreview.com]
[medellinguru.com]
[latinamericareports.com]
[en.wikipedia.org]

Suicide rates: U.S. 13.7 per capita. Japan 14.3 per capita. [en.wikipedia.org]

Let us see your supporting evidence.

@dahermit Your citations do not support your factual claims, in fact one of them says "there is no hard evidence that loosening access to firearms improves public safety or security" and "there is considerable evidence that responsible regulations are associated with reductions in gun-related homicides of civilians and police officers alike".

By the way, suicide by gun is still gun violence.

What would you like me to support with evidence since I didn't make any factual claims, Einstein?

@dahermit Perhaps actually read the articles before you pretend that they support your position next time, that way that way you won't have to try to refute them when I use them against you, Einstein.

Still waiting on what factual claims you imagine I've made.

The cause of your hermitry is apparent. I'm sure anyone who knows you approves.

legalise the drugs and ban the guns.

@MsDemeanour It would certainly make it easier to grind up the lower classes and cook them for the feedstock.

M4A and a UBI would help lift a lot of people out of poverty. Plus a ubi is beneficial to businesses in poor areas (poor people can't or won't save money so they spend it around and the tax goes back to the government)

That's part of it.

they got paid fortunately for a time the NRA is weaker

No. They value the right to own a gun. It is enshrined in the second amendment

@Heavykevy1985 Please familiarize yourself with the phrase "well regulated Militia".

@LovinLarge Don't you know the Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to own a gun?

@LovinLarge I have. It means that individuals are allowed be to well-armed and form citizen militias. Obviously, this is a concept that you are grossly unfamiliar with.

@Alienbeing Your factual allegations are meaningless without supporting evidence.

@Heavykevy1985 No, "well regulated" is not synonymous with "well-armed", Einstein.

@LovinLarge I asked you if you didn't know how the Supreme Court ruled on individual gun ownership. Your reply is a joke. It is EASY to Google the Supreme Court. If you want to remain ignorant, do so.

@Alienbeing You made the factual claim. The onus is on you to prove it. It's your job to support your position, not mine. Failure to do so means your claim is not credible. It's not a joke. It's how western cultures distinguish fact from fiction. Even I am embarrassed for you.

@LovinLarge As I said, if you want to remain ignorant, do so, I could not care less. You must be one of a very few not acquainted with that ruling. You remaining ignorant leaves YOU open to ridicule, not me.

Was the high tax rate one of the reasons?

@Alienbeing Funny. Great place to live. Boston is great. John Winthrop, first governor , is an ancestor, so is my ancestral grounds. John would be appalled that I am an Athiest. Actually, direct descendant of his sister who is buried in Groton, England.

@Healthydoc70 I lived in Boston. It is a nice city. However the Mass. taxes, and winters made it a chore.

@Alienbeing guess I am weird, Don't mind either one. Don't notice taxes and prefer cold and brisk to hot and damp with tornadoes, hurricanes and floods.

@Healthydoc70 To each his own, but I can't imagine how you don't notice the taxes.

@creative51 Try to comprehend what is written. OBVIOUSLY tax per se was not the issue. It was the extent of taxation. Perhaps you are unaware that Mass is a highly taxed State.

@creative51 I'm not looking for your sympathy or approval. When one does not recognize high taxes do not equal good government, I question that person's rationality.

You give ourself away when you say "importance of maintaining the group". What group? Who speaks for the group?

Last, you seem to infer that if a right wing group does not agree with you, it is at least in part because of an intelligence issue. How Pompus!

As soon as they filed the qturds and white supremacist groups propped them back up

every gun in civilian population must be single shot only.

@jlynn37 That's interesting, but it ain't gonna happen. How about a real solution?

@jlynn37 - Absolutely consistent with original intent - the firearm available when the 2nd Amendment was penned and ratified into the Constitution. Such a decision uses the same reasoning as to why opponent of same sex marriage claimed the 14th Amendment couldn't be applied to gay couples. The 14th, they said was written in the context of African Americans and therefore could only apply to African Americans. The reasoning (or "reasoning"?) Should also apply to the 2nd Amendment which was written in the context of muskets and therefore can only apply to muskets. Turn in all your other rifles and handguns, the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to them.

@RussRAB that kind of thinking makes sense but the greater context of the amendment is there for people to have the option to whatever is the current standard. It doesn't take a genius to realize technology changes over time and its not a stretch for the founding fathers to see that. When the constitution was written muskets were also standard issue military rifles, are you suggesting that the people be as armed as our military and have automatic rifles? Or are you suggesting we equip our soilders with muskets?

@RussRAB That "reasoning" is not reasoning in any legal context. The Second Amendment makes no reference to type of arms.

@Tejas - My comment was not intended to be serious. I think the Constitution needs to be viewed in the context of principles rather than so narrowly and specific as to apply only to a time period and the specific set of circumstances. Nothing would cause it to become outdated faster than to insist on spplying "original intent" as some would like to in certain circumstsnces. Restricting the 2nd Amendment to apply only to firearms present when the 2nd Amendment was written does not make sense. At the same time, neither does unrestricted access to any and aall weaponry. I think it might be really cool to own an atom bomb. I would only detonate it under the safest conditions. No? Them how about an operating fully armed tank? I will keep it in my garage and only take it out to shoot its ammunition on weekends. I think you get the point. We already have presedence for restricting firearms deemed too dangerous and too destructive for ownership by the public. It is ridiculous that we allow more restrictions to our voting rights and more regulation for our vehicles than we do firearms.

@Alienbeing - The 14th Amendment said nothing specific about African Americans, but I heard a number of people argue "original intend" to restrict its application to any other group of Americans ( that they didn't like). Of course, if you read my response to Tejas, I agree it is an unreasonable argument to make. At the same time, it is as unreasonable to believe that the 2nd Amendment should allow Americans unrestricted access to any firearm they desire.

@RussRAB "I heard" was and is a phrase frequently used by Trump. It is a meaningless phrase. It gives no context, nor even implies what was heard had any basis to be correct.

I agree the Second amendment shoud not allow a private citizen access to any firearm, however it does seem to do that. Most people think fully automatic weapons cannot be owned by private citizens. That is wrong, private citizens can own fully automatic weapons. It does require addtiional investigation and a seprate tax. However assuming the investigation comes out clean and the tax is paid, a private citizen can own a fully automatic weapon.

@Alienbeing FYI, this 2nd. Amendment was adopted into the U.S. Constitution POST- The War Of Independence, circa, 1791.
It WAS penned and adopted to turn the Civilian Population in to an Ad hoc form of Militia to help DEFEND the Country against any possible/future invasion/s or reprisals from the British, etc.
What, imo, Americans have done is to Twist and Contort an 18th. Century Ideology and Law to suit their 20th.- 21st. Century needs, means and ends.
Wake up and smell the Roses, No-one in their right frame of mind wants to invade you any more, neither the English, the French, the Mexicans or the REST of the world, you are being, imo, completely PARANOID, PERIOD.

@Triphid Long ago (I think it was in grade school) I learned that the Second amendment was part of the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the Constitution. As such I am not impressed with your knowledge of its origin. Any grade school attendee would know that. In fact I see you seem to relate the passage of the Second Amendment to worries of an invasion. Your assumption is WRONG! The Founding Fathers were worried about the American Federal Government, and wanted the population to be armed should the need to rebel against the Federal Gov become necessary. Therefore your attempt to educate only shows that YOU need the education

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of INDIVIDUALS to own firearms. End of story.

@Alienbeing FYI, I used a Search Engine and actually read up on the Origin, etc, of your vaunted 2nd. Amendment btw.
So, in an effort to be polite as there may well Ladies reading this discussion, may one most humbly suggest that you make an appointment with NEAREST Taxidermist.

@Triphid Ignored again

@Alienbeing Aw, should I be shedding tears of disappointment, not a Snowball's chance in Hell am I.

@Triphid When you can prove anything I said wrong, please do, until then I continue to ignore your idiotic messages. Did you argue with your two wives as poorly as you did here? It looks as it you did.

@Alienbeing Ah so, do I perceive here the ABSOLUTE Final response from a Loser, i.e. When ALL else has failed then attack on the very intimate and personal Level as your final solution.
Why, oh WHY, have you not entered into th Political Arenas, you'd be an Expert at their Personal Attacks Games imo.

@Triphid Insight hurts huh?

@Alienbeing No, not at all, I've faced down far, far better than you can EVER dream/imagine yourself to be and ALWAYS come out on top.

@Alienbeing But, I do suppose that you may have some 'expertise ' of sorts given where, imo, your head REALLY seems imo, to spends 99% of its time, insight -wise speaking that is.

@Triphid More B.S. You made a fool of yourself, and better yet, you didn't even realize it. Your arguments had no fact, I prove that EASILY.

Keep it up, you are such an easy target.

@Alienbeing Then show YOUR Proof why don't you?
Do the calculation as I requested for starters and MAYBE someone will actually believe you for a change.

@Triphid My proof is your ignorance.

@Alienbeing My apologies for my somewhat short absence, BUT i sorely needed to give birth to YOU imo.
No need to worry though, it is NOW swimming with the current and enjoying, I hope, the Scenic Tour of our local Sewage System.

@Alienbeing - Original Intend is a well known means of interpreting the US Constitution. The late Justice Scalia had discussed original intent and I believe it formed a basis for his declaration that the Constitution was a "dead" rather than a living document (although Scslia did stray from this stated position when it suited his agenda). What "I heard" isn't akin to the way trump use the phrase to tell lies, rather I had discussions with individuals online and in person who wanted to use the concept of original intend to argue against same sex marriage. I actually heard them speak or read what they wrote just as I am doing on this forum. So when I say (or write) "I heard" I am not lying but actually had an interchange with someone who communicated the concept I am relating to you (or whoever) from those interchanges. I use the terms correctly as they are defined "I heard". I would appreciate if you might be able to separate me from the likes of trump and refrain from assuming I use language in a dishonest way as trump does.

The 2nd Amendment like many of the Bill of Rights is rather simple: "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." What seems to be missing in today's interpretation of this Amendment is the initial statement - the part about a "well regulated Militia". I am not certain what this portion of the Amendment intended, but it could very well preclude the notion of unregulated private ownership of any firearm. Warfare and weaponry has come a very long way since the 18th century, and arming citizens with whatever they want without limits or regulation is ridiculous.

@RussRAB You ignore that fact that the Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment grants individual gun ownership rights to individuals. That ruing makes your entire response nothing more than an expression of opinion, which has been ruled incorrect.

@Triphid Your childish attempts at humor, and/or insult continue to reveal your intellect...... or better put, lack thereof.

@Alienbeing - I ignored nothing; and yes, it is my opinion as is most of what is expressed here on this forum. No one should think the Supreme Court is infallible, even if they are granted the final word. I am allowed to have opinion which is best when based on facts and reason. The 1st Amendment allows me to have opinions and the right to express them. I am not advocating to abollish an individual's right to gun ownership; only that gun can and should be regulated as we regulate our motor vehicles, our access to airports and airplanes as well as other venues, and now our voting rights. If these things can be so highly regulated, then so should gun ownership. We think little about restricting voting rights, but someone on a no fly list can purchase a firearm in venues with no background check and without restriction. That is factual but isn't reasonable.

@RussRAB Actually you did, you clearly did ignore the Supreme Court decision. You wrote as if it never existed. It doesn't matter whether you agree with the decisoin or not. Your approval or lack thereof is completly irrelevant. Of course you can have your own opinion, even if it is wrong, and it is.

I never said nor implied that gun ownership cannot be regulated. In fact I approve of many such forms of regulation.

@Alienbeing I do hope that you may well realize that the ONLY reason I have NOT blocked you is that I find you, imo, to be a dreary, ignoramus and well worth my time annoying you?

@Alienbeing - So, you are an alien mind reader able to tell me what I think. I will have to keep that in mind. Looks as if you are also ignoring the Supreme Court's ruling about regulating gun ownership since you say your opinion - as irrelevant as mine - also disagrees with the Supreme Court's decisions. In other words, you do a great job talking out of both sides of your mouth. I bet you get blocked a lot. I am beginning to understand why. I will likely follow suit since unlike @Triphid, I don't have time to spend on people worth annoying.

@RussRAB Life can often be quite tedious, imo, at times, hence I find 'amusement' of sorts in the sport of " Baiting and Exposing Trolls and the like for what they truly are."
Imo, this one was a really fun catch, not ONLY did it take the bait, the hook, the line and the sinker BUT it also went for the rod and reel as well.
I kind of doubt if catching a 15' Bull shark could even come close to this one.

@RussRAB Since your last reply makes no sense I cannot reply.

@Triphid The only things you exposed are:

1. Your ignorance
2. Your childishness

Keep on exposing.

@Triphid You don't annoy me, you amuse me. Your ignorance amazes me.

@Alienbeing - A response to be expected. Feigning ignorance and attempting to blame another. Your avitar is terribly appropriate - swollen head and eyes nearly swollen shut.

Saint Louis