Gun control debate (merged)

#2,003
#2,003
bnhunt said:
I was responding to anther sheep who claimed that I must be scared to leave my house because I want sensible gun legislation.
Click to expand...

Your problem is you've never explained what you consider to be "sensible" as opposed to what's already on the books.

You might help your case if you decided to actually talk about the issue rather than just sneering at other posters and making silly remarks about the ultra right wing fringe lunatic mob in particular.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#2,004
#2,004
bnhunt said:
I was responding to anther sheep who claimed that I must be scared to leave my house because I want sensible gun legislation.
Click to expand...
And you honestly believe that expanded background checks will impart any meaningful curb to gun violence. lulz.
 
#2,005
#2,005
SpaceCoastVol said:
And you honestly believe that expanded background checks will impart any meaningful curb to gun violence. lulz.
Click to expand...

I believe just because something is difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't try to do something about it. If that were the analysis, then slavery wouldn't have been abolished and women wouldn't have the right to vote, which a lot of republicans would probably be okay with unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,006
#2,006
Grand Vol said:
Your problem is you've never explained what you consider to be "sensible" as opposed to what's already on the books.

You might help your case if you decided to actually talk about the issue rather than just sneering at other posters and making silly remarks about the ultra right wing fringe lunatic mob in particular.
Click to expand...

If I recall, I specifically addressed a number of your questions from a post. Just because you don't agree with my position doesn't mean my remarks are "silly". I could certainly say the same thing about your position(s).
 
Last edited:
#2,007
#2,007
bnhunt said:
I believe just because something is difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't try to do something about it. If that were the analysis, then slavery wouldn't have been abolished and women wouldn't have the right to vote, which a lot of republicans would probably be okay with unfortunately.
Click to expand...
So.... do something, even if it is wrong, ineffective or logically inept. Got it. You are a rank and file mindless "progressive" drone. Congratulations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,008
#2,008
bnhunt said:
If I recall, I specifically addressed a number of your questions from in a post. Just because you don't agree with my position doesn't mean my remarks are "silly". I could certainly say the same thing about your position(s).
Click to expand...

There's a huge difference in your personal opinions on the matter and the laws currently on the books. A trait you share in common with LG.

And I'm still under the suspicion you are LG's alter ego.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,009
#2,009
bnhunt said:
If I recall, I specifically addressed a number of your questions from in a post. Just because you don't agree with my position doesn't mean my remarks are "silly". I could certainly say the same thing about your position(s).
Click to expand...

And if I recall, I blew up your "answers" from before and you never countered.

I win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,010
#2,010
bnhunt said:
I believe just because something is difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't try to do something about it. If that were the analysis, then slavery wouldn't have been abolished and women wouldn't have the right to vote, which a lot of republicans would probably be okay with unfortunately.
Click to expand...

I believe that every gun control activist should be asked to leave the country since it violates my conditional rights. This seems incredibly difficult but I guess by your logic we should try?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#2,011
#2,011
bnhunt said:
I believe just because something is difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't try to do something about it. If that were the analysis, then slavery wouldn't have been abolished and women wouldn't have the right to vote, which a lot of republicans would probably be okay with unfortunately.
Click to expand...

I firmly believe Slavery would have been abolished naturally had the north stopped bullying the south for it. Heavy Tariffs on imports the south used that didn't even get reinvested into the south wasn't a good thing. Automation in farming could have come sooner with that money the north was taking from the southerners and with the automation, it would have been more economical to just have the machines than it was slave labor.

Edit: women could vote prior to universal women's suffrage if they were land owners and many women at the time didn't want it either because they understood it as also having to apply for selective service. Meanwhile many men who were selected for the draft had no say in the politicians that sent them off to war because they were unable to vote.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,012
#2,012
bnhunt said:
Pot meet kettle. All you've done is spew hyperbole and right-wing rhetoric.
Click to expand...

When you said that anyone making under 100K should vote Dem for financial reasons and I countered with my own experience as to why that's a stupid idea, that's not a hyperbole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,013
#2,013
davethevol said:
When you said that anyone making under 100K should vote Dem for financial reasons and I countered with my own experience as to why that's a stupid idea, that's not a hyperbole.
Click to expand...

People making under 100k should absolutely not vote dem. The dems, fiscally, is the party of judging by intent rather than result.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,015
#2,015
CNCVol88 said:
I firmly believe Slavery would have been abolished naturally had the north stopped bullying the south for it. Heavy Tariffs on imports the south used that didn't even get reinvested into the south wasn't a good thing. Automation in farming could have come sooner with that money the north was taking from the southerners and with the automation, it would have been more economical to just have the machines than it was slave labor.

Edit: women could vote prior to universal women's suffrage if they were land owners and many women at the time didn't want it either because they understood it as also having to apply for selective service. Meanwhile many men who were selected for the draft had no say in the politicians that sent them off to war because they were unable to vote.
Click to expand...

Wow. I'm speechless. You just made an argument for why prolonged slavery and denying all women the right to vote would not have been all that bad. How very Republican of you.
 
#2,016
#2,016
Grand Vol said:
And if I recall, I blew up your "answers" from before and you never countered.

I win.
Click to expand...

I actually responded with facts supported by a myriad of articles on the various subjects and to my knowledge you responded with a lot of right-wing hyperbole and typical FoxNews regurgitation. You and I must have different definitions of "blew up".
 
#2,017
#2,017
bnhunt said:
Mandatory background checks for gun shows is "wrong" or "inept"?
Click to expand...

Now see, here you go with your false information and ignorance of the matter at hand.

Can you explain the "gun show loophole" satisfactorily? Because I can guarantee you there is no way you would say what you just did if you had the first clue what it actually was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,018
#2,018
Grand Vol said:
Now see, here you go with your false information and ignorance of the matter at hand.

Can you explain the "gun show loophole" satisfactorily? Because I can guarantee you there is no way you would say what you just did if you had the first clue what it actually was.
Click to expand...

The term refers to the viewpoint that there is an inadequacy in federal law, under which "[a]ny person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of the State where he resides as long as he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms".
 
#2,020
#2,020
During his campaign and presidency, President George W. Bush endorsed the idea of background checks at gun shows. Bush's position was that the gun show loophole should be closed by federal legislation since the gun show loophole was created by previous federal legislation.
 
#2,021
#2,021
bnhunt said:
During his campaign and presidency, President George W. Bush endorsed the idea of background checks at gun shows. Bush's position was that the gun show loophole should be closed by federal legislation since the gun show loophole was created by previous federal legislation.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance is astounding.

Why don't you try to go buy a gun at a gun show. You don't have to actually purchase it, just walk in the door and give it a whirl.

Tell us how it works out when you demand they don't do a background check.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,022
#2,022
bnhunt said:
Wow. I'm speechless. You just made an argument for why prolonged slavery and denying all women the right to vote would not have been all that bad. How very Republican of you.
Click to expand...

No, I showed how there's two sides to every issue.
 
#2,024
#2,024
bnhunt said:
I'm a democrat living in TN. You don't think I knew that already? All I hear is right-wing bs all day.
Click to expand...

If you don't already. Just love to Memphis. You won't have to hear right wing stuff. Just move to orange mound or near booker t Washington. Will be utopia for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top