Gun control debate (merged)

#7,701
#7,701
luthervol said:
I'm more curious as to why he refuses to speak for himself.
So he supports what he considers to be rational and reasonable gun laws but not what others consider to be rational and reasonable?
Feel free to answer for him.
Click to expand...
sure, no problem.

Once again, I have come to the conclusion that you are an idiot.

Your line of argumentation can go along like this by just changing the topic:

So he supports what he considers to be rational and reasonable immigration laws but not what others consider to be rational and reasonable?

Do you now see your idiocy?

Rational and reasonable, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens, Obsessed and InVOLuntary
#7,704
#7,704
hndog609 said:
Knock off the "Have you stopped beating your wife?" BS. If you want to discuss laws with people regarding firearms then cite them. Otherwise you're just trolling, and blatantly so.
Click to expand...
That's an easy question to answer. I never beat my wife and seeing as how you can't stop what was never started that's just really and incredibly stupid question. See how easy that was? But then I'm not weak in my position.
 
#7,705
#7,705
37L1 said:
sure, no problem.

Once again, I have come to the conclusion that you are an idiot.

Your line of argumentation can go along like this by just changing the topic:

So he supports what he considers to be rational and reasonable immigration laws but not what others consider to be rational and reasonable?

Do you now see your idiocy?

Rational and reasonable, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
Click to expand...
And this guy is allowed to vote. I think we need intelligence test before you're allowed to vote.
 
#7,706
#7,706
luthervol said:
That's an easy question to answer. I never beat my wife and seeing as how you can't stop what was never started that's just really and incredibly stupid question. See how easy that was? But then I'm not weak in my position.
Click to expand...
You are weak in your mind and totally out of your depth here in this thread.

OK, luther, here's your challenge:

You list what you consider to be additional "rational and reasonable gun laws" that you would like to be implemented.

Go ahead, don't be shy.
 
#7,707
#7,707
37L1 said:
sure, no problem.

Once again, I have come to the conclusion that you are an idiot.

Your line of argumentation can go along like this by just changing the topic:

So he supports what he considers to be rational and reasonable immigration laws but not what others consider to be rational and reasonable?

Do you now see your idiocy?

Rational and reasonable, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
Click to expand...
Of course I know it's in the eye of the beholder. That takes us back to the question I asked earlier that no one wished to answer,
Who gets to establish what is rational and reasonable?
I think the idiots may be the ones who can't see where this conversation always invariably leads.
Just trying to lead the horses to the water.
 
#7,708
#7,708
luthervol said:
That's an easy question to answer. I never beat my wife and seeing as how you can't stop what was never started that's just really and incredibly stupid question. See how easy that was? But then I'm not weak in my position.
Click to expand...

Stop pretending you aren't aware of the "Loaded Question Fallacy". Again, cite laws in question or you're trolling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#7,709
#7,709
luthervol said:
Of course I know it's in the eye of the beholder. That takes us back to the question I asked earlier that no one wished to answer,
Who gets to establish what is rational and reasonable?
I think the idiots may be the ones who can't see where this conversation always invariably leads.
Just trying to lead the horses to the water.
Click to expand...
We aren't talking about horses here, luther. But based on your discourse, maybe you are.

Now go ahead and answer my challenge.

Get Googling. . .
 
#7,712
#7,712
Yoo-Hoo, luther


37L1 said:
You are weak in your mind and totally out of your depth here in this thread.

OK, luther, here's your challenge:

You list what you consider to be additional "rational and reasonable gun laws" that you would like to be implemented.

Go ahead, don't be shy.
Click to expand...
 
#7,713
#7,713
37L1 said:
You are weak in your mind and totally out of your depth here in this thread.

OK, luther, here's your challenge:

You list what you consider to be additional "rational and reasonable gun laws" that you would like to be implemented.

Go ahead, don't be shy.
Click to expand...
It's pointless until we agree in principle.
ONE: Do most people support what they personally consider to be rational and reasonable gun laws?
TWO: Who determines what is rationale and reasonable?

I know that the answers are obvious and that you guys despise the obvious answers and therefor deflect at all cost.
 
#7,714
#7,714
hndog609 said:
Stop pretending you aren't aware of the "Loaded Question Fallacy". Again, cite laws in question or you're trolling.
Click to expand...
How in the world is "do you support rational and reasonable gun laws?" a loaded question fallacy? The fact that you would think it is pretty much tells the story.
 
#7,715
#7,715
37L1 said:
We aren't talking about horses here, luther. But based on your discourse, maybe you are.

Now go ahead and answer my challenge.

Get Googling. . .
Click to expand...
I have absolutely ZERO desire to answer that challenge. I'll let rational and reasonable be defined in the way in which we all know it ultimately will.
 
#7,716
#7,716
luthervol said:
It's pointless until we agree in principle.
ONE: Do most people support what they personally consider to be rational and reasonable gun laws?
TWO: Who determines what is rationale and reasonable?

I know that the answers are obvious and that you guys despise the obvious answers and therefor deflect at all cost.
Click to expand...

No it's not "pointless until we agree on principle" just because you say it is.

You are the one deflecting.

You obviously, (or should obviously), have some additional gun laws that you have in mind that you consider "rational and reasonable". So list them up here, now, and then we can define what "principle", "rational and reasonable", is, based upon your response. We have already stated what we think are "rational and reasonable" based upon existing law, which we say is more than enough.

Don't be a big chicken. Put your money where your mouth is and quit playing. Or should we assume that you don't even know what you are talking about? Spoiler alert: (safe bet.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and tennvols77
#7,717
#7,717
luthervol said:
How in the world is "do you support rational and reasonable gun laws?" a loaded question fallacy? The fact that you would think it is pretty much tells the story.
Click to expand...

It presupposes what the asker is going to find "reasonable". If you wish to debate what constitutes "rational and reasonable" then cite what you think qualifies. Otherwise there's no reason to engage you further on the matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1
#7,718
#7,718
37L1 said:
Back to beating dead horses, eh, luther?

Answer my challenge, quit fooling around.
Click to expand...
What's the point of that challenge? We both know that you and I do not individually determine what is rational and reasonable.
 
#7,720
#7,720
luthervol said:
I have absolutely ZERO desire to answer that challenge. I'll let rational and reasonable be defined in the way in which we all know it ultimately will.
Click to expand...
Meet luther, he gets around.

aHR0cDovL3d3dy5saXZlc2NpZW5jZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzEwMy8yOTIvb3JpZ2luYWwvY2hpY2tlbi1ydW5uaW5nLmpwZw==

live-chicken-500x500.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens and 82_VOL_83
#7,722
#7,722
luthervol said:
Do you support rational and reasonable gun laws? Try a 5th time, then I'll let you bask in your embarrassment.
Click to expand...
You are not worth responding to. It's like trying to have a discussion with a three year old. I asked you if you were stupid. You've answered that several times.
 
#7,724
#7,724
luthervol said:
What's the point of that challenge? We both know that you and I do not individually determine what is rational and reasonable.
Click to expand...
So luther, what's the freaking point?

You referred to "rational and reasonable gun laws."

So list them up. How hard is that? Then we can determine what's so rational and reasonable about them. That's what you are afraid of, isn't it, . . . well?

giphy.gif
 
#7,725
#7,725
hndog609 said:
It presupposes what the asker is going to find "reasonable". If you wish to debate what constitutes "rational and reasonable" then cite what you think qualifies. Otherwise there's no reason to engage you further on the matter.
Click to expand...
The issue is who determines what is rational and reasonable.
We will obviously disagree individually on what is rational and reasonable........that's a given.
Just for the sake of argument:
I think gun law A is rational and reasonable.
You think gun law A is not rational and reasonable.
Anyone shocked or surprised???????

The question is who decides which one of us is correct?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top