Nonsense. None of your factually baseless accusations have any merit.
Ignoratio Elenchi, Argumentum Ad-hominem, Du Chaudron, Strawman Fallacy, Fallacy of Composition, Magical Thinking, Appeal to Emotion, Post Hoc, Affirming the Consequent... the list goes on--pick one, Princess.
Done. Now let's see if you can make a point using valid logic applied to verifiable facts of reality.
Anyone can go on line and list logical fallacies.
Not in dispute. What is your point?
Without providing examples you have done nothing beyond mentally masturbating (MM).
You didn't ask for examples, Princess; you asked for the logical fallacies you've committed. Is that not so? Of course it is.
That you think, oops, that you believe your response is anything but MM is sad.
Well, if you belive my response is something other than what you asked for, then you're just delusional.
However, it seems you wish to be exposed. Here you go:
Aw, poor baby, so afraid of being "punished" I bet you resent re
d lights and stop signs, hate government and any idea which might in some tiny manner impact your rights.
Hating the Government, and/or resenting traffic law is beside the point.
Basically you're dishonest. I want everyone who wants to own, possess or ever have in their custody and control licensed by their state. Posting lies won't change my policy positions no matter how often those on the fringe try to rewrite it.
This isn't about anyone trying to rewrite or change your policy positions by "posting lies." And calling me dishonest, is just another red herring.
BTW, I recommend you look up the work "culpable", maybe your ignorance will defend your foolish remarks.
Seriously. Your rebuttals are so meaningless that you make the pretence that I need to look up the word, "culpable".
Racism seems to go hand in hand with a gun fetish and bigotry. The common denominator ... drum roll please .... hate and fear.
Of course not, you're a callous conservative who lives by the motto, I got mine, **** the rest of you.
Let's just say this is all true... it has ZERO bearing upon the validity of their point.
We need a national registry of those persons who should never be permitted to own, possess or have in their custody and control a gun.
with:
I want everyone who wants to own, possess or ever have in their custody and control licensed by their state.
Your notions are just laughable. "Let's just make a registry of EVERYONE! Treat all criminals as criminals, and all potential criminals as crimiminals!" What could go wrong with that?
You're better off arguing for just one.
The NRA and its followers offer no solutions, for their rights to enjoy their fetish, supersede the rights of everyone else.
None of this is true, and it is presented only because it's easier to attack than what is true.
You must be stupid. The rhetoric above is clear and convincing evidence that those with a gun fetish are also racist. That you deny that is cause to wonder if you are a liar or stupid. I believe you are both.
Just because someone with a "gun fetish" posts something racist, it does not follow that those with a "gun fetish" are racists.
Once again, laws do not prevent crime. We have laws because most people believe in them and some people are also afraid of the punishment. Thus a law prevents some illegal activity but never ever all of it.
What's magical about your thinking, is the notion that creating new criminals with a stroke of the legislative pen will have ANY preventative effect upon crime.
What's all the more magical about your thinking is the fatuous notion that those individuals who don't license themselves, who don't register their guns, who don't submit themselves to background checks now (because of their criminal background or criminal intent), will suddenly do so when such requirements are made "universal." That burdening the open market for guns will in some way never before seen weaken the black market for guns.
Do you ever wonder about the parents of the children denied the right to have a life?
I can do this too: Yeah. I wonder... if they could go back to the place and time just moments before their children w
ere murdered... if they had the choice between having a gun to defend their children, or the gun-control law that was a barrier ONLY to them having a gun to defend their children, if they'd still choose the gun-control over having the gun.
Still not an appeal to emotion? I'm just wondering, because it is well agreed upon that submitting to your appeal to emotion would have had ZERO effect upon the tragedies you're waving at us to support your argument.
Guns are ubiquitous in our culture and easily obtained by all of us,...
It does not follow that the violence that is alarming us--even the "gun violence"--is caused by guns being ubiquitous.
We have a problem and that problems is gun violence. It impacts families, schools, small business, government services on all levels and health care.
Asserting that "gun violence" would be diminished by removing guns, is asserting the same kind of meaningless tautology that asserts getting rid of boats would diminish drownings; the argument is specious, and it distracts from discussing a "violence problem"--that is not solvable by the policy positions you advocate.
The rhetoric above is clear and convincing evidence that those with a gun fetish are also racist.
...and...
The NRA and its followers offer no solutions, for their rights to enjoy their fetish, supersede the rights of everyone else.
Your use of "gun fetish" is in every case you've used it just a pre-emptive ad-hominem, whose purpose is to paint all pro-rights arguments with the same tar brush.
Guns are ubiquitous in our culture and easily obtained by all of us, even those most of us agree should never own, possess or have one in their custody and control.
Do you have any kind of solution other than the patently ineffective, idiotic, immoral, and/or unconstitutional schemes to restrict access for everyone BUT those most of us agree should never own, possess or have one in their custody and control"?
Let's just see what you got for us.
Gun sales to those who should never have access to them can be limited if a national registry existed, where anyone who sold a gun could check to see if the buyer was legally licensed on line.
Why make a list of legal owners...who are merely exercising their natural, civil, and constitutionally protected right--WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG--when instead you could make a list of prohibited persons? Why?
There is ONLY one reason; general confiscation.
There exists no Constitutional Right to Privacy,...
4th Amendment; 9th Amendment; 14th Amendment. See: Griswold v. Connecticut ... and Roe v Wade.
*mic drop.*
... no matter how the NRA and its supporters want to spin "infringed".
What do you mean by "spin"?
Thus the sale a of a gun to an unlicensed person would become a felony,...
Upon what constitutional, rational, and/or moral grounds do you validate requiring a license to exercise a natural, civil, and constitutionally protected right?
... and cause to suspend or revoke the license of the seller.
For the seller would by definition become a criminal.
Malum Prohibitum. You're obviously looking to create criminals out of legislation for the sole purpose of creating criminals.
It would also make sense for all new guns sold to be registered to the buyer, and when the gun is sold, it is sold to a buyer licensed, and the record of the sale be forwarded to the DOJ.
You say criminals would register their guns. Really?
What? Only the law-abiding would? Why do you want to know only about law-abiding folks and their lawfully owned guns? Tell us, Princess.
There's a reason gun registries are illegal, Sweetheart... they have only unconsitutional purposes.
Thus, if the weapon is used in a crime, it can be tracked to its lawful owner;...
Who probably didn't commit any crime. Keystone Cop action right there.
... and, if the gun is stolen, it can be reported as such and recorded on the same registry.
Which can happen anyway WITHOUT a registry.
Can and will fraud continue?
Only in the private sector, right? The State is above that. There is no possibilty that the kind and benevolent State and it's incorruptible agents would abuse the powers granted to them... let's just get rid of laws all together... particularly that pesky Constitution and its inconvenient Bill of Rights.
Of course, but laws are made because (1) honest citizens understand the need for laws and respect them, and (2) those who violate the law are punished. That is why they mostly work. To not have laws is anarchy.
Laws like the Bill of Rights? What does it mean to not have your rights protected by law?
There is no rational rebuttal to this argument;...
There are plenty.
...only an emotional challenge;...
Irony is ironic. Your argument is ENTIRELY founded upon emotion. Your proposals are ENTIRELY emotional reaction.
...such challenges always includes a recitation of the Second Amendment,...
Didn't you just say, "To not have laws is anarchy."?
Why yes, you did!
...which only fools and those challenged by reality believe is sacrosanct.
The 2nd Amendment is every bit as "sacrosanct" as the rest of the Bill of Rights... your implication that rights-proponents are asserting otherwise is really just another of your strawmen.
Getting a license will be easy, as long as one has never been convicted of a crime of violence,...
OR getting on a list of Prohibited persons is just as easy--commit a violent crime.
And creating a list of prohibited persons is much less intellectually, morally, and constitutionally repugnant than putting folks on a special list because they are exercising any of their natural, civil, and constitutionally protected rights.
...has never been civilly detained as a danger to themselves or others, found by a court to be a member of a criminal gang, sanctioned with a restraining order or on probation.
ALL OF THIS can be accomplished without violating ANY of the natural, civil, and constitutionally protected rights of the People.
Of course anyone prohibited by the Gun Control Act of 1968 should be unable to secure a license.
Of course the Gun Control Act of 1968 should be repealed. For all the OBVIOUS reasons.
