CDZ Gun Control

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Wry Catcher, Dec 22, 2015.

  1. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,404

    Just a question…what is it with the colors….?
     
  2. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,404


    And they are worthless for stopping gun crime. Criminals use people with clean records to get the gun…since there is nothing in their history……mass shooters, pass the background check because there is nothing in their history…
    So what does a background check do….one, it costs money in some of these blue states that is excessive, two, it takes time and most of the time the initial refusal is a mistake, delaying the owner from getting the gun..

    The biggest thing…..current background checks do not stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns…..which is good for the gun grabbers…that allows them to demand "universal background checks" which will then be circumvented by criminals the same way current checks are gotten past and mass shooters will still be able to pass them…

    But……..the gun grabbers can then demand gun registration to allow Universal Background Checks to be possible..because if you don't know who has the gun, you can't know if a background check was done for the transfer….and once they have registration…..then they can ban the guns when they get the political will…..
     
  3. Kalki
    Offline

    Kalki Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Messages:
    132
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +43
    Read 'The Second Amendment Primer' by Les Adams. It is filled with the American founder's quotes and views on guns and why the right to self-defense is considered necessary. Then, read Blackstone's 'Commentaries on the Laws of England', in particular the section on the development and origin of the concept of the natural human right to self defense and why it was considered a necessity. It was solely due to the fear of authoritarian government, and to enable a last resort for the people to abolish a government that became tyrannical and governed against the will of the people.

    The first battle of the Revolutionary War in America between the "rebels" and British soldiers, when the British army was marching to confiscate guns in the town of Concord to prevent the "rebels" from defending their interests against the tyrannical government that did not have their interests.
     
  4. Kalki
    Offline

    Kalki Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Messages:
    132
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +43
    Read 'The Second Amendment Primer' by Les Adams. It is filled with the American founder's quotes and views on guns and why the right to self-defense is considered necessary. Then, read Blackstone's 'Commentaries on the Laws of England', in particular the section on the development and origin of the concept of the natural human right to self defense and why it was considered a necessity. It was solely due to the fear of authoritarian governments, and to enable a last resort for the people to abolish a government that became tyrannical and governed against the will of the people.

    The first battle of the Revolutionary War in America between the "rebels" and British soldiers, was when the British army was marching to confiscate guns in the town of Concord to prevent the "rebels" from defending their interests against the tyrannical government that did not have their interests.
     
  5. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    38,058
    Thanks Received:
    5,076
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +12,060
    None of which is relevant to the issue of gun control. Control is not banishment and does not even imply confiscation except for due cause.

    The right to self defense is sacrosanct and the ability to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable / dangerous, violent criminals, drunks and drug addicts and members of criminal gangs is something all rational Americans understand and support.
     
  6. Kalki
    Offline

    Kalki Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Messages:
    132
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +43
    No, taking guns away is the goal of gun control, but the Soros, Bloombergs, Feinsteins, etc., know they must first train people to think like you first, and remove the guns in little steps, like boiling frogs by slowly turning up the heat. Many of the gun control advocates have openly admitted that a complete confiscation is the goal but they know they cannot do it in one go.

    Do the dangerous people have a right to the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, or are there restrictions to them too?

    The Soros, Bloombergs, Feinsteins, etc. have trained you to think that a free people have limitations on arms. The truth is if there is someone who cannot be trusted with a gun, because they will use it to violate the rights of another, then that person should not be allowed in society in the first place. If you cannot trust someone when you let them out of their cage, then they do not belong in society in the first place. Pointing at their criminality and denying them the right as a free citizen to own weapons, is a way to steadily and slowly remove these rights from everyone. Every rational person understands that if someone cannot be trusted with a gun, that person does not belong in society.
     
  7. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    38,058
    Thanks Received:
    5,076
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +12,060
    This ^^^ is not original and is simply a lot of words in creating the logical fallacies common to all who oppose gun controls, known as the Slippery Slope and the Straw Man.

    Gun control is not a false dichotomy, no regulations or total confiscation; that is how every single thread on this topic is characterized by those who oppose gun control. It is dishonest and completely fabricated form of rhetoric.

    You have no inside knowledge of what the Soros, Bloombergs or Feinsteins plan, and simply make up a worst case scenario which is illogical and in some cases pathological. It is fear mongering and hate mongering, and thus not reasonable or logical.
     
  8. Kalki
    Offline

    Kalki Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Messages:
    132
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +43
    The gun control advocates are continuously quoted in the NRA publications. What I wrote is an absolute fact. It is not a logic fallacy to point at what the proponents of gun control say themselves, that their true goal is total confiscation. I would suggest studying your enemy (the NRA magazine ) before you comment further. Subscribe to the
    '1st Freedom' magazine by the NRA and you will see how much you have been lied to, by the proponents of gun control. The general news media is one-sided stories and half-truths and lies. The only way you will learn this is by studying the literature of those groups you oppose. Don't just do this for guns, do it for everything and every group you oppose. This will make you objective.


    Do internet searches for who owns the media. It is in the hands of a very few people who work together. Read 'Propaganda' by Edward Bernays.
     
  9. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    20,218
    Thanks Received:
    1,766
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Ratings:
    +4,572
    Which has nothing at all to do with firearms in common use for traditionally lawful purposes, and especially those sorts of lawful weapons possessed at home that are suitable to militia duty.

    It worked for the Iraqi and Afghani insurgents

    You cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of universal licensing of gun owners and/or registration of firearms.
    Absent that demonstrated necessity, you cannot present a sound argument for the constitutionality of same.

    No one has argued otherwise.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
  10. Kalki
    Offline

    Kalki Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Messages:
    132
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +43
    I argued that if people cannot be trusted with a gun, they do not belong in society in the first place and should not be let out of their cage.
     

Share This Page