Horrible, Horrible Day’: Multiple Fatalities At Molson Coors Facility In Milwaukee, Mayor Says

you mean like a species that breeds like resources are infinite fits humanity perfectly. So maybe the most effective species to hunt should be humans.

And where have you traveled that you really think it is unsafe to travel without a rifle. South Chicago perhaps?

 

Of course not. Already support the NRA’s efforts to eliminate the human menace through giving anyone and everyone guns.

 

Off topic and irrelevant. As well as factually incorrect.

 

These are definitely good questions to have answers to before you form an opinion on gun ownership.

Why don't you know these things? If your lifestyle does not require gun ownership, that's just fine. No one is demanding you own one.

But don't project your lifestyle on everyone. People live in and deal with different circumstances than you deal with. If you have no knowledge of those circumstances your imposed decisions can have consequences you never expected. The food on your grocery shelves might disappear, for instance.

https://www.drovers.com/article/chronic-wasting-disease-time-bomb-agriculture

 

what does that link have to do with guns? And yes I have guns but I bought to deal with a major wild hog problem which is now gone. At least for a time.

 

It has to do with the subject of conservation. Specifically the issue of eliminating the spread of an illness that could render certain species of animals extinct, and contaminate an untold amount of forest territory in the process.

 

Conservation is an entirely separate topic from gun control.

 

You wouldn't accept it even if you had been there in person listening to the discussions of the people involved when they decided on it.

 

I disagree. Especially when part of your argument in support of control created a burden to prove need.

 

Fact remains: Your claim is insupportable nonsense and your response to me does nothing to mitigate this.

 

Well if hunting to keep the herd from getting to big and thus prone to disease is your rational for hunting then what you are really doing is preserving a heathy crop for future hunters. Otherwise real conservation is allowing nature to do it’s thing.

 

Dead animals contaminate a forest. Where did that concept come from?

 

And that's why I know you don't know the difference between conservation and preservation.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion

 

Why do you ignorantly thinkbelieve that self-defense is not a valid reason for having a firearm?

 

The belief that the state should have a monopoly on force.

 

Now that belief is just ignant.

 

Well sure.
But that's why.

 

It might be if there were universal background checks and the people were trained in proper usage.

 

Since all animal die And eating the flesh of a hunted animal. Could spread the problem I see no relevance to the hunting question.

 

Have you ever heard of a dictionary?

 

Thus suggesting the belief that private individuals do not actually hold the right of effective self defense against harm. Suggesting that only those who somehow further a compelling state interest are worth protecting, but all others are not and can be ignored.

 

What does that have to do with your false statement? Did you read that "real conservation is allowing nature to do it’s thing." in a dictionary?

 

It would be nice for once to hear an argument from someone who wishes to regulate a problem that actually has a comprehensive understanding of the problem.

It's so often that regulators take a narrow view of a single issue, and attempt to make grand changes to entire systems without any regard to how those systems function. The hubris required to believe that you can determine whether or not someone needs an object that millions of people possess is astounding. What's not astounding is how often these people demonstrate their ignorance of the systems they seek to control.

 

Why do you hate America and its Constitution?