Limiting rights because of the actions of the tiny minority

See OP

  • Limiting the gun rights of the law abiding is acceptable

    Votes: 2 6.1%
  • Limiting the religious rights of the law abiding is acceptable

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Both are acceptable

    Votes: 4 12.1%
  • Neither is acceptable

    Votes: 27 81.8%

  • Total voters
    33
Well argued! With this level of discourse and intellect, why haven't I become a Conservative?
Easy: Your lack of integrity and your rampant intellectual honesty, as evidenced by your self-admitted double-standard.
And what on God's green Earth would you know about integrity and intellectual honesty?
I'm sorry that you don't like the fact that you've been called on your intellectually dishonest, biogted, partisan double-standard -- but it's YOUR double standard, so there's nothing -I- can do about it.

Maybe if you werent such an intellectually dishonest partisan bigot you would not have these issues.
:dunno:

My work here is done - back into the pit with you.
 
Last edited:
You call it rare, I call it an everyday occurrence. You use labels...I'm using facts. You can hate them or call an everyday occurrence rare, special or apple pie. No matter what you call it, its still an everyday occurrence. Are you disagreeing with me or just have a man crush?

And I use statistics... showing it to be a rare occurrence... what, are shark bites/attacks now and not considered rare because they happen somewhere probably every day? I know, Royal Straight Flushes are not statistically rare, because somewhere they are dealt every day... Oooo, or even spina bifida is probably not rare, although probably someone or a few someones are born with it every day

You sir, are indeed a buffoon

Shark bites dont happen everyday...I said it happens daily. Are you disagreeing with that or just crying to be crying?

OK.. since there is not a complete number on shark bites (my guess would be also that all are not reported in many areas of the world.. hmmm.. kinda like all vote fraud cases are not reported because it has to be caught) so another example you can say is simply animal attacks... since you did not like that one (though you ignored the others)..

The FACT is that the murder rate in comparison to the number of sheer people in the populace makes it indeed a RARE occurrence....

We take it that statistics was not your strong point, nor percentages

Now if you took the number of murders in the US in a year and projected it against things such as over-votes in a single election in a single day, which do you think is higher?? (And we have seen the overvote numbers in many elections)
 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And this is how some folks manage to marginalize themselves here. Set up a trap door question, get utterly baffled by a simple, direct question, claim intellectual superiority and clear the field.

I should just debate the wall in front of me. It's easily as intellectually formidable as anything I've read under your avatar.
 
Well argued! With this level of discourse and intellect, why haven't I become a Conservative?
Easy: Your lack of integrity and your rampant intellectual honesty, as evidenced by your self-admitted double-standard.
And what on God's green Earth would you know about integrity and intellectual honesty? Or the virtue of a high capacity magazine?

Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.

If a law was enacted outright banning the use of "high capacity magazines" then all you need to do it change the definition of "high capacity" from 50 (or whatever that number is) to 1 and you've essentially outlawed the use of a gun.

If a lunatic can get hold of any gun and do something bad with it, it ultimately isn't going to matter too much whether or not he has a high capacity magazine or not. He'll still kill people in cold blood, it'll still be a tragedy and he'll still be the exception and not the rule.
 
Last edited:
And I use statistics... showing it to be a rare occurrence... what, are shark bites/attacks now and not considered rare because they happen somewhere probably every day? I know, Royal Straight Flushes are not statistically rare, because somewhere they are dealt every day... Oooo, or even spina bifida is probably not rare, although probably someone or a few someones are born with it every day

You sir, are indeed a buffoon

Shark bites dont happen everyday...I said it happens daily. Are you disagreeing with that or just crying to be crying?

OK.. since there is not a complete number on shark bites (my guess would be also that all are not reported in many areas of the world.. hmmm.. kinda like all vote fraud cases are not reported because it has to be caught) so another example you can say is simply animal attacks... since you did not like that one (though you ignored the others)..

The FACT is that the murder rate in comparison to the number of sheer people in the populace makes it indeed a RARE occurrence....

We take it that statistics was not your strong point, nor percentages

Now if you took the number of murders in the US in a year and projected it against things such as over-votes in a single election in a single day, which do you think is higher?? (And we have seen the overvote numbers in many elections)
All of this is an attempt by CC to misdirect the topic away from the fact that he believes that it is OK to limit the rights of gun owners, but not Muslims.

Don't feed the troll.
 
Easy: Your lack of integrity and your rampant intellectual honesty, as evidenced by your self-admitted double-standard.
And what on God's green Earth would you know about integrity and intellectual honesty? Or the virtue of a high capacity magazine?

Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.
Don't feed the troll. He's not capable of an intelligent or honest discussion of the issue.
 
Easy: Your lack of integrity and your rampant intellectual honesty, as evidenced by your self-admitted double-standard.
And what on God's green Earth would you know about integrity and intellectual honesty? Or the virtue of a high capacity magazine?

Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.

If a law was enacted outright banning the use of "high capacity magazines" then all you need to do it change the definition of "high capacity" from 50 (or whatever that number is) to 1 and you've essentially outlawed the use of a gun.

If a lunatic can get hold of any gun and do something bad with it, it ultimately isn't going to matter too much whether or not he has a high capacity magazine or not. He'll still kill people in cold blood, it'll still be a tragedy and he'll still be the exception and not the rule.
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.
 
And what on God's green Earth would you know about integrity and intellectual honesty? Or the virtue of a high capacity magazine?

Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.

If a law was enacted outright banning the use of "high capacity magazines" then all you need to do it change the definition of "high capacity" from 50 (or whatever that number is) to 1 and you've essentially outlawed the use of a gun.

If a lunatic can get hold of any gun and do something bad with it, it ultimately isn't going to matter too much whether or not he has a high capacity magazine or not. He'll still kill people in cold blood, it'll still be a tragedy and he'll still be the exception and not the rule.
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie
 
Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.

If a law was enacted outright banning the use of "high capacity magazines" then all you need to do it change the definition of "high capacity" from 50 (or whatever that number is) to 1 and you've essentially outlawed the use of a gun.

If a lunatic can get hold of any gun and do something bad with it, it ultimately isn't going to matter too much whether or not he has a high capacity magazine or not. He'll still kill people in cold blood, it'll still be a tragedy and he'll still be the exception and not the rule.
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.
And you get to determine someone's need?
He's a mindless partisan bigot - of COURSE he knows what everyone needs.
{Don;t feed the troll)
 
Last edited:
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

I live in Chicago, and if i found myself in the middle of one of the many shootings going on here on a regular basis, 6 wouldn't be nearly enough for me to feel comfortable.

And to DiamondDave's point. If i'm hunting in the wildnerness and could possibly be attacked by a Bear, or a Boar, or something that could easily kill me if it got me on the ground, let's just say the more ammo i have to fire off without having to reload, the better.

I don't even own a gun. I don't hunt, don't go shooting, etc. But, i recognize the needs/desires of many law abiding citizens. Guns and high capacity magazines don't kill people: people kill people.
 
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

I live in Chicago, and if i found myself in the middle of one of the many shootings going on here on a regular basis, 6 wouldn't be nearly enough for me to feel comfortable.

And to DiamondDave's point. If i'm hunting in the wildnerness and could possibly be attacked by a Bear, or a Boar, or something that could easily kill me if it got me on the ground, let's just say the more ammo i have to fire off without having to reload, the better.
Never mind that the right to keep and bears arms has everything to do with killing people, not bears.
 
Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.

If a law was enacted outright banning the use of "high capacity magazines" then all you need to do it change the definition of "high capacity" from 50 (or whatever that number is) to 1 and you've essentially outlawed the use of a gun.

If a lunatic can get hold of any gun and do something bad with it, it ultimately isn't going to matter too much whether or not he has a high capacity magazine or not. He'll still kill people in cold blood, it'll still be a tragedy and he'll still be the exception and not the rule.
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie

I need 5 tons of fertilizer and 40 bottles of Sudafed. Why cant I get them?
 
Define "high capacity." Because it's easy to say "50 rounds is high capacity" but it might not be to some people.

If a law was enacted outright banning the use of "high capacity magazines" then all you need to do it change the definition of "high capacity" from 50 (or whatever that number is) to 1 and you've essentially outlawed the use of a gun.

If a lunatic can get hold of any gun and do something bad with it, it ultimately isn't going to matter too much whether or not he has a high capacity magazine or not. He'll still kill people in cold blood, it'll still be a tragedy and he'll still be the exception and not the rule.
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie
Hunt for bear with a Glock do you? Or an AR-15?
 
I love my Saiga 12 and the 12 round 12 gauge magazines I have for it... I will not give up my modified 20 and 30 shot clips for my AR either.... and as a military vet, I will tell you the AR is not an assault rifle, it is a military LOOKING rifle in a familiar design that is no different from any other 223 semi automatic rifle... it just LOOKS scary to the anti-gun nuts

I can cause just as much damage with a classic looking .22 as I can with an AR
 
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

I live in Chicago, and if i found myself in the middle of one of the many shootings going on here on a regular basis, 6 wouldn't be nearly enough for me to feel comfortable.

And to DiamondDave's point. If i'm hunting in the wildnerness and could possibly be attacked by a Bear, or a Boar, or something that could easily kill me if it got me on the ground, let's just say the more ammo i have to fire off without having to reload, the better.

I don't even own a gun. I don't hunt, don't go shooting, etc. But, i recognize the needs/desires of many law abiding citizens. Guns and high capacity magazines don't kill people: people kill people.
One shot kills one person. Having dozens of shots allows you to shoot up a theater or class room or restaurant. And you're right. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. But guns don't die. People die.
 
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie
Hunt for bear with a Glock do you? Or an AR-15?

And yes, I do hunt with an AR, and my Saiga is right with me as well
 
A weapon holding more than 6 (SIX) rounds is high capacity. If you can't hit your prey (and I'm assuming the weapon will be designed and used exclusively for hunting) after six shots, you shouldn't be hunting, should you?

Now, if you can explain why anyone would absolutely need more than six rounds in a weapon, I'm happy to listen.

And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie

I need 5 tons of fertilizer and 40 bottles of Sudafed. Why cant I get them?

In actuality.. you can.. farmer up the street orders more fertilizer than that, and the local mom and pop store orders way more than 40 bottles of sudafed at a time

Will I agree to register whatever weapon I purchase?? Sure.. no skin off my nose... but I sure as hell will not agree to have a 6 shot clip on my Bushmaster or go away from my 12 shot clips on my Saiga..
 
And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie
Hunt for bear with a Glock do you? Or an AR-15?

And yes, I do hunt with an AR, and my Saiga is right with me as well
Hunting in this area (the upper Ohio River Valley) is like skiing is in Vail. I've yet to meet anyone who would hunt with an AR-15. Most of the hunters here use shotguns (in Ohio for deer and turkey) or a 30.06 rifle for deer (In Pennsylvania and West Virginia for deer).

It seems they enjoy the venison. A tough thing to do if eight or twelve rounds has been pumped into the deer. Most hunters revel in dropping their quarry with one shot, not emptying a clip into their prey.
 
And you get to determine someone's need? You want only 6 shots when your are defending yourself in an unknown situation?? You want to be hunting a bear or come across one while hunting and only have 6 shots available??

200 in a barrel clip, I might agree with you on high capacity... but if you enjoy going to the range and firing off that many on full auto on your tommy gun, so be it... but 6 is not high capacity, sorry Charlie

I need 5 tons of fertilizer and 40 bottles of Sudafed. Why cant I get them?

In actuality.. you can.. farmer up the street orders more fertilizer than that, and the local mom and pop store orders way more than 40 bottles of sudafed at a time

Will I agree to register whatever weapon I purchase?? Sure.. no skin off my nose... but I sure as hell will not agree to have a 6 shot clip on my Bushmaster or go away from my 12 shot clips on my Saiga..
Don't feed the trolls.
 

Forum List

Back
Top