Gun control debate (merged)

#12,203
#12,203
luthervol said:
The line has always and will always be debated. As it should be.
It's the asinine screeching that a line is somehow anti 2a that needs to stop.
Click to expand...

“Shall Not Be Infringed Upon” . Are you going to enlighten us on the definition of that word ? You know the one word I’m talking about right , the one in the 2a . The only time the word is ever used pertaining to our rights in the constitution.
 
#12,205
#12,205
0nelilreb said:
“Shall Not Be Infringed Upon” . Are you going to enlighten us on the definition of that word ? You know the one word I’m talking about right , the one in the 2a . The only time the word is ever used pertaining to our rights in the constitution.
Click to expand...
I asked earlier and never saw your answers:
Is banning the purchase of an AK-47 an infringement?
Surface to air missile? Infringement?
ICBM? Infringement?
 
#12,206
#12,206
luthervol said:
I asked earlier and never saw your answers:
Is banning the purchase of an AK-47 an infringement?
Surface to air missal? Infringement?
ICBM? Infringement?
Click to expand...

You answered a question with a question . Is why you didn’t get a reply . Don’t dodge the question just to redirect the argument sir .
 
#12,209
#12,209
0nelilreb said:
You answered a question with a question . Is why you didn’t get a reply . Don’t dodge the question just to redirect the argument sir .
Click to expand...
I understand your reluctance to answer.

But just for the fun of it:
Infringement- irrational and unreasonable restriction of a right.
 
#12,213
#12,213
luthervol said:
I could not vote in any of those. I could not vote in GA and then drive across the state line and vote in Alabama.
I'm okay with that. I understand why restrictions are needed.
Click to expand...
Because that is how the system was set up. One person one vote.
The 2a was set up differently. Shall not be infringed upon.
 
#12,215
#12,215
luthervol said:
I understand your reluctance to answer.

But just for the fun of it:
Infringement- irrational and unreasonable restriction of a right.
Click to expand...

I understand why you won’t answer my question and so does everyone else . Gun grabbers hate that question because there is no work around to .. “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON” .
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#12,217
#12,217
37L1 said:
Why stop there?

Nuclear warheads and delivery systems, infringement?

You need to study up on your Anti 2A talking points.
Click to expand...

This is one of Looth's favorite trolls.

The banging on about nukes or sarin gas (whatever) is mostly philosophical at this point in time. Banning an entire class of weapons, the most popular rifle type in the country for some time now in fact, is very much a real issue. Keeping entirely within established federal law the semi-automatic rifle (civilian versions of things like the AR and AK included) meet every conceivable definition set forth in Heller as being in common (like, very very very common) use for lawful purpose.

I believe there is at least one (MA?) case on the matter already headed to SCOTUS. Until the highest court issues a decree on the matter people in some states are living in a kind of pre-Heller situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1 and Rickyvol77
#12,218
#12,218
McDad said:
If a state bans AR 15s and that action will certainly save one child's life, then each type of weapon in use is equivalent to some number of children dying. If so, why not ban all firearms which would (by your assertion) save even more children's lives?
Click to expand...
I have not heard of a lot of shotguns being used in mass shootings.
 
#12,220
#12,220
bnhunt said:
Not entirely accurate. I just believe in sensible gun legislation.
Click to expand...

Sensible is Subjective . Example , my firearms have never harmed or inflicted any pain on a human being . You can’t even say that about yourself as a person , but yet you want to “ sensibly control “ my firearms ? In what realm is that even logical ?
 
#12,221
#12,221
0nelilreb said:
I understand why you won’t answer my question and so does everyone else . Gun grabbers hate that question because there is no work around to .. “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON” .
Click to expand...
What????????
I just did answer your question.
Now wold you care to answer mine?
 
#12,222
#12,222
bnhunt said:
I have not heard of a lot of shotguns being used in mass shootings.
Click to expand...
I find it odd you answered a question which was not asked.

Is every firearm equivalent to some number of children dying?

Additional rhetorical Qs:
Do you want to save the life of one child as you mentioned yesterday, or not? Is the life of one child only valuable when congregated with other people?
Are you willing to learn something? Guns used in mass shootings 1982-2019 | Statista
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and joevol33
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top