Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Slade3200]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.

First, what purpose do you believe will be served by making it more difficult for criminals and crazies to buy guns? Do you really think being unable to buy a gun for a reasonable price at a legal gun store will stop someone, anyone, who wants a gun from getting one?

Have you ever heard of Prohibition? How about the current War On Drugs? This has been going on at near police-state intensity for more than three decades and the result has been drugs are more available today than they were when this counterproductive folly was started -- and they cost less.

We who oppose any further nibbling away at the Second Amendment are well aware that guns cannot be controlled anymore than drugs can. We know that nothing can come of this endless attempt to disarm us other than further inconvenience to legitimate gun owners. Because if the background check idea is enacted it's not going to end there. Little by little these anti-gun opportunists, most of whom know nothing about guns, are afraid of them, and are not inclined to defend themselves under any circumstances, won't stop until your Second Amendment rights are limited to keeping a single-shot .22 rifle chambered for short, and bearing it to a federally supervised range.

Guns are in this Nation's DNA. Nothing short of totalitarian, door-busting, full-bore police-state methods will put an end to the occasional shooting, mass-shooting, and armed stand-off. So let's put an end to this creeping prohibition before it reaches that level.

The only gun law I approve of is a comprehensive training requirement and competence test for anyone who wishes to own a gun or guns -- and intensified training for anyone who wishes to carry -- open or concealed.

(Pardon the excessive boldface. It is the result of a quirk I can't control.)

I appreciate your ideas and think you make a good case for your argument. I just don't agree that it is anybody's agenda to take your guns away, that is completely unrealistic. People are scared of guns because getting shot is damn scary and there are more accidents and opportunistic suicides because children, criminals, and mental unstable people have easy access to guns, so why not try and limit exposure? True if somebody really wants a gun they can get one, however, if we make it just a little harder and if only 1% of people trying to get a gun don't get one and it prevents death... well that is a win in my book.

I think your idea about training and certification is a great one. I have no problem with responsible people owning guns. I would hope that you as a gun owner would ONLY want responsible people to own guns because in the wrong hands a gun is a scary thing.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

 

[Rustic]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

Only a fool would think Barry is a decent and honest in the slightest... Progressives are so gullible.

What the fuck does "Barry" have to do with what I just posted?

Slippery slope comes to mind...
Lol

 

[Slade3200]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

 

[Rustic]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Why do you think there is a 2nd amendment?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

I hate it when some noob comes along and you have to explain the same shit thats been hashed over a million times.

 

[Slade3200]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

Only a paranoid fanatic is preparing for the next civil war. I hope you got your bunker fully stocked, because as you stock your arsenal preparing for the war that will never come, the majority of us are trying to do things that actually make a difference.

What is with all the references to the war on drugs?? I don't see the relation, that is a completely different subject.

 

[Rustic]

Barrys support in the military is all but nonexistent, the asshole is so full of himself, any soldier can see through the smoke and mirrors our douche bag commander-in-chief is throwing up...

Lol

 

[Slade3200]

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

I hate it when some noob comes along and you have to explain the same shit thats been hashed over a million times.

I'm just pointing out the fact that nobody is really making sense or an intelligent argument. You all are fighting against an effort that is trying to make our world safer... Instead of helping the cause yall fight and bitch about it... It baffles me.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Gun Control - What's the Problem?"

Problems, actually.

Such as many on the right who are ignorance of Second Amendment jurisprudence, who refuse to accept the fact that the Second Amendment right is not absolute, and conservatives who contrive and propagate ridiculous lies about 'gun confiscation.'

 

[Rustic]

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

Only a paranoid fanatic is preparing for the next civil war. I hope you got your bunker fully stocked, because as you stock your arsenal preparing for the war that will never come, the majority of us are trying to do things that actually make a difference.

What is with all the references to the war on drugs?? I don't see the relation, that is a completely different subject.

Millions have zero trust of the asshat sitting in the White House... After all he's just an career politician the lowest of life forms.

Lol

 

[80zephyr]

"Law's won't keep guns out of the hands of criminals" I agree, if somebody really wants a gun then they will be able to get one. Just like if somebody wants to get into your house or car then can do it by just breaking a window, but we still lock our doors and get security systems."

I'm still not hearing an argument that I understand that counters the efforts being made to help solve a small part of a very big problem. Isn't something better than nothing? Why aren't we working together on this? Yes, efforts to improve law enforcement and focus on mental health will help, along with many other ideas, but those are a different conversation... Focusing on the simple propositions by the president... Why the opposition and how are they hurting our rights??

Isn't something better than nothing? Well, what do you call the hundreds of gun laws on the books already?

Mark

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Maybe a scenario will help:

So Republicans go along with whatever DumBama wants with gun control. Now shrinks are able to rat to the federal government who they believe should not be allowed to own a firearm. What do you believe the results would be?

For starters, people would be in fear of getting mental help if they knew it could mean forfeiting their rights to own a firearm for protection. They would likely not seek help unless it was a last resort and suffer with whatever it is that was bothering them.

Or let's say that somebody who was receiving treatment did take a gun and kill his family. The first question would be why didn't his psychiatrist report him to the government so he couldn't get a gun? Afterwards, all medical personnel would fear not reporting patients to the government in the very unlikely event one of them flips out and does something crazy with a gun. Therefore just about everybody would be reported, and there you have backdoor gun confiscation; because the next step is to allow physicians to be held liable if one of their patients did something awful with a gun.

It's all a smoke screen. Just like DumBama was yelping about people on the No Fly list being able to legally buy firearms. So let me ask: who was the last person that was on the No Fly list that legally purchased a gun, and did harm with it? Nobody. It's all more BS just for more gun control by the government.

"Folks, liberals measure success by the intent, not by the results."
Rush Limbaugh

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

I hate it when some noob comes along and you have to explain the same shit thats been hashed over a million times.

I'm just pointing out the fact that nobody is really making sense or an intelligent argument. You all are fighting against an effort that is trying to make our world safer... Instead of helping the cause yall fight and bitch about it... It baffles me.

How about you do a search here on USMB.
This same topic has been discussed ad nauseam.

New laws will do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

And I'll ask again...Do you know the reason we have the 2nd Amendment?

 

[80zephyr]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

Three of the first four posts supply your answer all in the same way: the old Slippery Slope fallacy.

Post 11, as is his wont, prefers the Strawman.

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

You assume that the US will somehow not go bankrupt. The US is no better than any other country. When our credit runs out, the US will cease to exist. While you might not believe the US to ever be tyrannical, I would not assume the next ruling class not to be.

Mark

 

[Rustic]

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

I hate it when some noob comes along and you have to explain the same shit thats been hashed over a million times.

I'm just pointing out the fact that nobody is really making sense or an intelligent argument. You all are fighting against an effort that is trying to make our world safer... Instead of helping the cause yall fight and bitch about it... It baffles me.

 

[Rustic]

"Gun Control - What's the Problem?"

Problems, actually.

Such as many on the right who are ignorance of Second Amendment jurisprudence, who refuse to accept the fact that the Second Amendment right is not absolute, and conservatives who contrive and propagate ridiculous lies about 'gun confiscation.'

...and progressives have no right to define the Second amendment... They don't have the common sense to do so.

 

[Slade3200]

The "slippery slope" argument is the one that I do not understand. Why oppose something that makes sense in fear of possible future proposals that may or may not take away your rights? Why not do what is right now in an effort to help a big problem (even if it just helps a little) and fight proposals that impede your rights if/when they are proposed?

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

Only a paranoid fanatic is preparing for the next civil war. I hope you got your bunker fully stocked, because as you stock your arsenal preparing for the war that will never come, the majority of us are trying to do things that actually make a difference.

What is with all the references to the war on drugs?? I don't see the relation, that is a completely different subject.

Millions have zero trust of the asshat sitting in the White House... After all he's just an career politician the lowest of life forms.

Lol

I'm not a fan of everything the President does but I do respect the fact that he wakes up everyday and does what he can to make our country a better place. He has devoted his life and his families life to it. Along with his efforts he has to fight and argue with people on all sides and in todays culture gets more resistance than respect or assistance. "Asshat" really?? Although it is a great term which I will use in other context, perhaps about the author Rustic... It is completely inappropriate to use about the Commander and Chief. It is embarrassing to see the degradation of character that we as people have digressed to... Which everybody would show a little more God Damn Respect... hmm hmm GOP

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Two questions:
Are you college aged?
And do you understand that confiscation of weapons can and does sometimes leads to a tyrannical government?

Why would you take that chance when our government has taken a chunk of control in the form of gov run healthcare?
Next comes the cashless society where they can monitor your purchases.
You already cant go anywhere without being recorded or tracked on a toll road.
It's getting to be to close to 1984 for my taste...

I am 36 and the odds of us facing a tyrannical US government is about as likely as seeing a unicorn. To be honest I find that argument to be the least valid. Lets go with the unlikely scenario that the government does decide to take over, do you honestly think that the citizens would stand a chance against the military? Take the arsenal of your choosing and you still do not stand a chance, that time has come and gone. Hundreds of years ago, I understand the argument. Living in a place like Syria, I understand the argument... Living in the USA in 2016... Your freedom is better defended with your voice and your vote than it is with your gun. Many of you with this old school way of thinking need to get with the times... You would better support your cause with a stronger argument. In my opinion

Only a blithering idiot would think that all military personnel would back a socialist asshole as commander-in-chief and go against the people.
Now go hide

Only a paranoid fanatic is preparing for the next civil war. I hope you got your bunker fully stocked, because as you stock your arsenal preparing for the war that will never come, the majority of us are trying to do things that actually make a difference.

What is with all the references to the war on drugs?? I don't see the relation, that is a completely different subject.

Millions have zero trust of the asshat sitting in the White House... After all he's just an career politician the lowest of life forms.

Lol

I'm not a fan of everything the President does but I do respect the fact that he wakes up everyday and does what he can to make our country a better place. He has devoted his life and his families life to it. Along with his efforts he has to fight and argue with people on all sides and in todays culture gets more resistance than respect or assistance. "Asshat" really?? Although it is a great term which I will use in other context, perhaps about the author Rustic... It is completely inappropriate to use about the Commander and Chief. It is embarrassing to see the degradation of character that we as people have digressed to... Which everybody would show a little more God Damn Respect... hmm hmm GOP

Fuck Barry....
That piece of shit cant get out of the white house fast enough.
He makes Jimmy Carter look exemplary.