They Said Biden Wouldn’t Come for Our Guns. The Plan Says Otherwise.

[alang1216]

I asked you a question:
How do you suggest we make it more illegal [for criminals and the mentally infirm to possess guns] and what effect will that have?
Well?

Not 'more illegal' just harder to get if you are not eligible to own one.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Not 'more illegal' just harder to get if you are not eligible to own one.

Look at you, holding on to the fallacy that governments can enact laws that will prevent people from breaking other laws.
Why not just enact laws that will prevent people from committing murder and assault and leave law abiding gun owners alone?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Nope.

Now you lie about your lies.

 

[ding]

In real life, no right is absolute. You have a 1st Amendment right to free speech but we also have libel and slander laws. Same with the 2nd, there are many restrictions on what kind of gun you can buy. I'm just an advocate for tweaking the restrictions already in place.

You are playing a game of semantics by inferring that things that aren't rights are rights. Our rights are indeed absolute. There is no right of slander and libel. There is a right to free speech. Just like there is no right to own any weapon, but there is a right to own and bear arms.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You are playing a game of semantics by inferring that things that aren't rights are rights. Our rights are indeed absolute. There is no right of slander and libel. There is a right to free speech. Just like there is no right to own any weapon, but there is a right to own and bear arms.

"All bearable arms" - those in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.
This covers any class of firearm you care to name.

 

[ding]

Not 'more illegal' just harder to get if you are not eligible to own one.

With ~300 million firearms in America, how do you propose doing that?

Could it possibly be that there is no systemic problem in America? That what is driving your concerns are isolated events of a few bad apples which are statistically insignificant?

 

[ding]

"All bearable arms" - those in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.
This covers any class of firearm you care to name.

I see it a little different. I go back to the intent. The intent was for the populous to be able to defend themselves from tyranny. In that light, we should never accept anything less than the minimum standard to do so. And today, that would be semi-automatic firearms with high capacity magazines. That should be the line in the sand.

 

[alang1216]

You are playing a game of semantics by inferring that things that aren't rights are rights. Our rights are indeed absolute. There is no right of slander and libel. There is a right to free speech. Just like there is no right to own any weapon, but there is a right to own and bear arms.

NO right is absolute in America.

• You have right to free speech but there are things you can't say.
• You have right to assemble but there are restrictions on where and when you can do it.
• You have right avoid cruel and unusual punishment but the definitions are always changing.
• You have right to bear arms but there are arms you can't own.

 

[alang1216]

With ~300 million firearms in America, how do you propose doing that?

Like the vast majority of Americans, I favor gun registration.

Could it possibly be that there is no systemic problem in America? That what is driving your concerns are isolated events of a few bad apples which are statistically insignificant?

They are statistically significant to the families of the victims. How many lives are too many?

 

[M14 Shooter]

NO right is absolute in America.

• You have right to bear arms but there are arms you can't own.

The 2nd amendment protects the right to own and use 'all bearable arms" - those in common use for traditionally lawful purposes. This covers every class of firearm you care to name.
So, while there are weapons we cannot own, we have the right to own every kind of firearm.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Like the vast majority of Americans, I favor gun registration.

"No."
- US Constitution

 

[alang1216]

The 2nd amendment protects the right to own and use 'all bearable arms" - those in common use for traditionally lawful purposes. This covers every class of firearm you care to name.
So, while there are weapons we cannot own, we have the right to own every kind of firearm.

The 2nd was reinterpreted by SCOTUS in 2008 to be an individual right. Like Roe v Wade, interpretations of the Constitution ebb and flow.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The 2nd was reinterpreted by SCOTUS in 2008 to be an individual right.

This is a lie, as the court has never interpreted the 2nd to protect anything but an individual right.
Why did you lie?

Aside from that:
Avoided the point, did you?
Tried to change the subject, did you?
Concession accepted.

Fact remains:
While there are weapons we cannot own, we have the right to own every kind of firearm.

 

[ding]

NO right is absolute in America.

• You have right to free speech but there are things you can't say.
• You have right to assemble but there are restrictions on where and when you can do it.
• You have right avoid cruel and unusual punishment but the definitions are always changing.
• You have right to bear arms but there are arms you can't own.

Yelling fire in a crowded theater isn't free speech.
Assembling in NORAD isn't a right of assembly.
Moving from hanging to electrocution to lethal injection didn't mean hanging and electrocution were cruel and unusual.
Having a reasonable minimum standard isn't negated by not being allowed to own a tank.

Bottom line. Keep your paws off my semi-automatic firearms and high capacity magazines.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Bottom line. Keep your paws off my semi-automatic firearms and high capacity magazines.

And my M60, with 200rd belts of AP.

 

[ding]

Like the vast majority of Americans, I favor gun registration.

And how will that accomplish your goal of less gun violence and gun accidents?

 

[ding]

They are statistically significant to the families of the victims. How many lives are too many?

That's an emotional response. Given your logic, autos, booze and sex should be registered.

The reality is society does not - and should not - legislate every single risk. One should be reasonable in their approach as opposed to being emotional in their approach.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Oh look:

Boo knows she doesn't have a meaningful response.
Must be out of talking points.

 

[alang1216]

Yelling fire in a crowded theater isn't free speech.
Assembling in NORAD isn't a right of assembly.
Moving from hanging to electrocution to lethal injection didn't mean hanging and electrocution were cruel and unusual.
Having a reasonable minimum standard isn't negated by not being allowed to own a tank.

Bottom line. Keep your paws off my semi-automatic firearms and high capacity magazines.

I guess we no longer need SCOTUS since we have you to tell us our Constitutional rights.

 

[alang1216]

And how will that accomplish your goal of less gun violence and gun accidents?

It is easy for criminals to get unregistered guns. Virginia is notorious for being the source of illegal guns found in NYC.