Gun control debate (merged)

[NorthDallas40]

I'm not sure what your even saying here.

We've gone from rights which are limited. To rights prohibited if infringing on other's rights. To knowing when or when not to take issue which isn't a right.

I’ll say I don’t think my rights are limited. I’m just not allowed to violate another person’s rights while exercising my own. I don’t see that as a limitation, there is no right to infringe on another without good cause, IE to use lethal force for self defense.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I'm not sure what your even saying here.

We've gone from rights which are limited. To rights prohibited if infringing on other's rights. To knowing when or when not to take issue which isn't a right.

Have you met Luther?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Vehicle?
Fertilizer?
Rat Poison?
Strong acids?
Gasoline and mason jars?
Trebuchet?

All of the above. 2a doesn’t deal with self defense 2a deals with government oppression. So we should be able to meet force with equal force. Add tanks artillery and airplanes to the list as far as I’m concerned.

 

[McDad]

Equal to or greater than the danger presented by guns.

Way too much subjectivity on both sides of the equation (diagnosing someone as unstable, danger relative to guns). I am in favor of committing someone who is dangerous which takes away many rights. Your ideas sound too much like simple gun-grabbing. Cannot get on board with it due to subjectivity and potential for abuse of power.

 

[luthervol]

All of the above. 2a doesn’t deal with self defense 2a deals with government oppression. So we should be able to meet force with equal force. Add tanks artillery and airplanes to the list as far as I’m concerned.

Nukes?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Nukes?

If whoever is oppressing you sure. Equal force with equal force.

 

[luthervol]

Way too much subjectivity on both sides of the equation (diagnosing someone as unstable, danger relative to guns). I am in favor of committing someone who is dangerous which takes away many rights. Your ideas sound too much like simple gun-grabbing. Cannot get on board with it due to subjectivity and potential for abuse of power.

There is no subjectivity or potential for abuse of power with committing people?

 

[McDad]

All of the above. 2a doesn’t deal with self defense 2a deals with government oppression. So we should be able to meet force with equal force. Add tanks artillery and airplanes to the list as far as I’m concerned.

Agreed.

But i was offering items for Luther to remove from said dangerous person.

I have more fear changing my tire on the interstate than i do a close proximity to an armed person.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Agreed.

But i was offering items for Luther to remove from said dangerous person.

I have more fear changing my tire on the interstate than i do a close proximity to an armed person.

Yep.

 

[hndog609]

Congratulations. You just Red Flagged yourself.

I was wanting to post a picture and hope it gave Looth a case of, IDK, maybe Cotard's Delusion or at least some gout.

 

[McDad]

There is no subjectivity or potential for abuse of power with committing people?

There is.

 

[luthervol]

If whoever is oppressing you sure. Equal force with equal force.

So the global objective to keep nations from obtaining nukes is wrongheaded? Not only should all nations be allowed nuclear capability but individuals as well?
Mutually guaranteed destruction brought to the individual level.....got to love it.

 

[luthervol]

Agreed.

But i was offering items for Luther to remove from said dangerous person.

I have more fear changing my tire on the interstate than i do a close proximity to an armed person.

I have more fear standing on the top step of a ladder than I do changing a flat on the interstate.

 

[NorthDallas40]

So the global objective to keep nations from obtaining nukes is wrongheaded? Not only should all nations be allowed nuclear capability but individuals as well?
Mutually guaranteed destruction brought to the individual level.....got to love it.

Yep it sure is. We are hypocrites in telling anybody they can’t have nukes. We’re the only power to ever use them.

Nice try at a non sequitor though to deflect from your floundering

 

[NorthDallas40]

I have more fear standing on the top step of a ladder than I do changing a flat on the interstate.

Keep that in mind when you get ran over by some idiot on their phone instead of paying attention to the road.

 

[luthervol]

There is.

Maybe we can give the person the option: give up your guns, nukes, and trebuchets or we will have you committed.

 

[luthervol]

Yep it sure is. We are hypocrites in telling anybody they can’t have nukes. We’re the only power to ever use them.

Nice try at a non sequitor though to deflect from your floundering

So in your ideal world, more countries would have nukes? Individuals would have nukes?

 

[luthervol]

Keep that in mind when you get ran over by some idiot on their phone instead of paying attention to the road.

I'm sure that will be foremost in my thoughts.

 

[NorthDallas40]

So in your ideal world, more countries would have nukes? Individuals would have nukes?

In my ideal world we would be responsible for our own defense and develop counters to potential threats instead of dictating what other sovereigns can and cannot do which is none of our damn business. I think giving diplomacy a try is fine. I would expect them to say piss off in reply though.

And I’ve told you this before and you know it. So instead of using this deflection to get out of McDad showing your usual lunacy why don’t you re-engage him on the gun topic?

 

[NorthDallas40]

I'm sure that will be foremost in my thoughts.

That and irony... and the last thing that goes thru your brain might be the other drivers phone!

 

[luthervol]

In my ideal world we would be responsible for our own defense and develop counters to potential threats instead of dictating what other sovereigns can and cannot do which is none of our damn business. I think giving diplomacy a try is fine. I would expect them to say piss off in reply though.

And I’ve told you this before and you know it. So instead of using this deflection to get out of McDad showing your usual lunacy why don’t you re-engage him on the gun topic?

I never disengaged him on the gun topic; but I do enjoy exposing lunacy, wherever one might find it.

And you know full well that it would be a more unstable world if more countries had nukes........not to mention extrapolating to the individual level.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I never disengaged him on the gun topic; but I do enjoy exposing lunacy, wherever one might find it.

And you know full well that it would be a more unstable world if more countries had nukes........not to mention extrapolating to the individual level.

The stability of the world has nothing to do with us having any business telling another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do. Try diplomacy all we like. However I would not expect a favorable outcome.

And the lunacy exposed here is you thinking we have any business dictating who can and cannot have nukes for your own piece of mind. The world isn’t a safe place. We need to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

 

[DynaLo]

I'm guessing they assumed people would be able to rationally and reasonably adhere to the 2A.

Lol..we are adhering to the 2A.

All 133+ million of us.

 

[azVolFan]

I think it is incredibly low, almost non-existent. I would love for the actual numbers to be known.

I guess you're in favor of the citizenship question on the census and then for the census can be compared to registered voters?

 

[hog88]

LOL.....If we can't accurately identify with 100% accuracy who is crazy enough to warrant taking their guns, it seems a little silly to think we can accurately identify with 100% accuracy people who are crazy enough to lock up. I would rather ere in temporarily taking one's guns unjustifiably than locking them up unjustifiably. Plus it's a whole lot cheaper and less governmentaly intrusive.

Ahh, just as I thought, you are nothing but transparent.