Photo Thread.

[TheoK]

yes vermont and amazing it's possible to walk into a store, hand the guy a drivers license and he calls the cops and ask if it's ok to sell the person a handgun and if they say no reason not to we can walk out the door in minutes with a gun and bullets. No permit needed to carry it around loaded.

That hasn't been possible in Sweden for over 80 years, at least not with one hand guns. .22 rifles and shotguns were free the longest but now all firearms are licensed. 

Which is A Good Thing. The statistics speak volumes.

Yes, they killed lots of people in Sweden before 1927. Every day.

Yes, dear. /pats Lit on the head

Passive-aggressive coward. You know I'm right.

WERE THERE MORE OR LESS CRIMES WITH GUNS IN SWEDEN IN THE 1920s THAN IT IS TODAY? JUST ANSWER THAT SIMPLE QUESTION!

[TheoK]

Here are two girls. The first is Katarina. She's happy, because she had a tazer when some jerk tried to rape her.

The second is Linda. She didn't have a tazer or other weapon, so she's not so happy. But she got cultural enrichment by Somalis, which "our" politicians like that much. She should be grateful for the Swedish gun law, that made her easier to enrich.

[odeon]

yes vermont and amazing it's possible to walk into a store, hand the guy a drivers license and he calls the cops and ask if it's ok to sell the person a handgun and if they say no reason not to we can walk out the door in minutes with a gun and bullets. No permit needed to carry it around loaded.

That hasn't been possible in Sweden for over 80 years, at least not with one hand guns. .22 rifles and shotguns were free the longest but now all firearms are licensed. 

Which is A Good Thing. The statistics speak volumes.

Yes, they killed lots of people in Sweden before 1927. Every day.

Yes, dear. /pats Lit on the head

Passive-aggressive coward. You know I'm right.

WERE THERE MORE OR LESS CRIMES WITH GUNS IN SWEDEN IN THE 1920s THAN IT IS TODAY? JUST ANSWER THAT SIMPLE QUESTION!

You might want to reread the post I replied to, instead of shouting your head off (on second thought, keep shouting). The discussion was about Sweden *and* the US.

You really need to work on that reading comprehension problem of yours.

[TheoK]

And why was it about both countries? Because you know that there were less gun crimes in Sweden in the 1920s, when anyone could get a gun in a hardware store or pawnshop than there are today. But your self-righteousness makes it impossible to admit a weakness in your argumentation.

[odeon]

And why was it about both countries? Because you know that there were less gun crimes in Sweden in the 1920s, when anyone could get a gun in a hardware store or pawnshop than there are today. But your self-righteousness makes it impossible to admit a weakness in your argumentation.

It was about BOTH countries because Johnny was talking about Vermont while you were ranting on Swedish gun laws.

And it's "fewer", btw. 

[TheoK]

OK. Were there F*E*W*E*R crimes with guns involved in SWEDEN in the 1920s?

[Lucifer]

what would be really funny now is if the O Man replied with, "dunno."

[odeon]

Sheesh, Lit, I was referring to the the US violent crime statistics of today. Who gives a fuck about what Sweden was like 80 years ago? I don't; I haven't checked.

I doubt there are reliable statistics on the subject, but even if there were, they would be quite irrelevant. Can you tell the class why?

[Lucifer]

yes, he can:

[TheoK]

Sheesh, Lit, I was referring to the the US violent crime statistics of today. Who gives a fuck about what Sweden was like 80 years ago? I don't; I haven't checked.

I doubt there are reliable statistics on the subject, but even if there were, they would be quite irrelevant. Can you tell the class why?

Sure. I actually have a diagram showing it:

[odeon]

Sheesh, Lit, I was referring to the the US violent crime statistics of today. Who gives a fuck about what Sweden was like 80 years ago? I don't; I haven't checked.

I doubt there are reliable statistics on the subject, but even if there were, they would be quite irrelevant. Can you tell the class why?

Sure. I actually have a diagram showing it:

That is about something else. I take it this is where you fill in the blanks (of which there are too many to count) with your racist drivel?

[TheoK]

That is about something else. I take it this is where you fill in the blanks (of which there are too many to count) with your racist drivel?

That is the only reason, if any. The revolver was invented around 1850 and the browning around 1900, so it isn't that the guns are more dangerous today. It also isn't that the average ethnical Swede is more violent today.

[odeon]

"The only reason, if any"?

Racist drivel, as usual.

[TheoK]

"The only reason, if any"?

Racist drivel, as usual.

So, tell me the reasons. The guns aren't more dangerous than they were back then. And even poor people could buy guns in a pawnshop, so it's not that more people can afford them today. And the average Swede isn't more violent either. Please tell me the mysteries of the draconian gun laws.

[odeon]

"The only reason, if any"?

Racist drivel, as usual.

So, tell me the reasons. The guns aren't more dangerous than they were back then. And even poor people could buy guns in a pawnshop, so it's not that more people can afford them today. And the average Swede isn't more violent either. Please tell me the mysteries of the draconian gun laws.

This argument's been beaten to death on this forum--the whole gun issue has. It's boring as fuck. If you want to know my opinions, use the search function. I have no interest in trying to bring any sense into you because you wouldn't listen.

Face it--Sweden will not change because the powers that be disagree with you. Want more liberal gun laws? Move.