Debate: Constitutional Provision for Gun Ownership is Out of Date with Current Realities

Discussion in 'Congress' started by rocket propelled, Jan 7, 2017.

  1. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    35,734
    Thanks Received:
    4,752
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +10,595
    And of course it is so easy to carry a cannon into a movie theater, an airport or onto a college campus.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    35,734
    Thanks Received:
    4,752
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +10,595
    KIA's, US force 58,000
    KIA's VC/NVA (est. 500,00 to 1.4 million)***

    *** Vietnam War casualties - Wikipedia

    How about those Alamo Defenders?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. miketx
    Offline

    miketx Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    22,204
    Thanks Received:
    2,193
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +24,376
    Forgot about those. Thanks. As you are no doubt aware, facts like these mean nothing to the stains.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    35,734
    Thanks Received:
    4,752
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +10,595
    Those who talk the talk, but when it comes to walking the walk, my guess is the first time they see the Elephant they run like a bat out of hell.
     
  5. miketx
    Offline

    miketx Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    22,204
    Thanks Received:
    2,193
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +24,376
    They would never be there to begin with. It's a club for men, not makeup wearing pathetic sissies.
     
  6. Frankeneinstein
    Offline

    Frankeneinstein VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2016
    Messages:
    1,707
    Thanks Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,057
    Even if that's all true, what's your point? how is having less weaponry better than none? it would seem that the more out gunned you are the more the need for it. but that aside, isn't the claim about guns from those that want stricter controls claiming that they are not wanting to take them away or abolish the second amendment? or has that argument become so transparent that abandoning it altogether now seems a face saving way to go...and what about the first amendment, with all the high tech communications systems and devicecs have we progressed beyond the need for a free press?...I hope not
     
  7. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    35,734
    Thanks Received:
    4,752
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +10,595
    Nice attempt at a spin, sorry, it does not turn. Three points:
    1. Gun control does not mean total gun confiscation from the public sector. The argument that is does, or that any form of gun control will lead to such an outcome is a logical fallacy, i.e. a Slippery Slope Argument. There may be a few extremists who seek such an outcome, but the vast majority of those who seek some control over who owns, possesses or has in their custody and control a firearm does not seek the outlaw of guns by sober, sane and law abiding citizens for protection;
    2. Many NRA supporters argue that any form of gun control violates the 2nd A.; given the fact that gun violence in America has become a common event, one which kills and maims innocents by accident or design, a circumstance with great the costs to treat surveyors, an autopsy when necessary, and the criminal investigation are costly, and paid for by the taxpayer;
    3. Finally, some forms of gun control already exist, and in the opinion of Scalia in Heller, room was left for gun controls; the NRA and it's advocates' argument's against any form of gun control, like yours, are specious.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Frankeneinstein
    Offline

    Frankeneinstein VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2016
    Messages:
    1,707
    Thanks Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,057
    AAAHHH, Red Flag alert, when ever a liberal dose of left wing spin is upcoming it is always preceded with the accusation that someone else is guilty of it, unfortunately for you I know how to debunk spin, it needs to be parsed, broken down and dissected piece by piece in order to expose its folly...example follows.
    TOTAL? hmmmm...it may not, but it is what the left refers to as a good first step in that direction

    That's why it is done in steps, no one step toward the abolishment of anything can be called that, it is when the final step at gun control is enacted that we arrive at a meaningless amendment, it will exist on paper only. It's like removing a tooth, that does not make you toothless, until they are all removed that is, you will still have a mouth to eat with but no bite.
    and the slippery slope cliche you tried to pass off as the problem for those who are defending a 250 year old amendment would mean you believe we have been on that slope for our entire existence...when in reality it is those that trifle with our constitutional rights that put us on a slippery slope.

    REALLY???
    And which category does this fit into:
    Debate: Constitutional Provision for Gun Ownership is Out of Date with Current Realities
    this is the one you really need to answer!
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  9. Frankeneinstein
    Offline

    Frankeneinstein VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2016
    Messages:
    1,707
    Thanks Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,057
    You know why, because they are the "sober, sane and law abiding citizens;" you referred to. and I would ague that each form of gun control is just another step toward making the 2nd amendment toothless...the fact that you keep referring to the NRA and the second amendment only further strengthens the argument that this about a transparent attempt to abolish the 2nd amendment.
    sounds like a sound argument for the death penalty with no appeals process...which I also would oppose
    Well then, problem solved
    Please give the context

    Using another cliche only highlights the transparency of your argument...you do realize if that if you believe the argument looks and appears to be correct but you for whatever reason do not understand it, it would appear to be "specious", while believing in a fallacy such as the one put forth by the left on gun control and parroted here almost word for word by you would not seem "specious" to you just simply because you choose to believe it...I would refer you back to your claim of not wanting to take guns away from "sober, sane, law abiding citizens" and then referring to those same citizens [the NRA] as the ones that are the problem...do you see the awkward contradiction there? if not, that would explain why you see my argument as "specious" and not yours.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  10. rocket propelled
    Offline

    rocket propelled Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    16
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +5
    What about the jets, subs, tanks etc?
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

content