0nelilreb
Don’t ask if you don’t want the truth .
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2010
- Messages
- 28,263
- Likes
- 45,147
Do you know and/or understand the laws that are currently in place regarding firearm ownership?
You aren't ceding sufficient chunks of an an enumerated right to match some people's definition of "sensible".
I no longer argue with idiots that have told me I should be reasonable or rational after they have admitted they would vote for anyone coming from the left to be POTUS . Bloomberg is anti gun , not reduced access or limited anything , he and his foundation that he created are anti gunners . Some of these people in here arguing about reasonable and rational have already said they would vote for him .
Which does nothing to prevent gun violence.
It’s almost like... PEOPLE WITH CRIMINAL INTENT HAVE NO INTENTION OF FOLLOWING THE LAW!!What ? Do you mean that our sensible speed limit laws doesn’t prevent speeding ? Does that mean our sensible breaking and entering laws won’t stop people from doing that either ? What about our sensible legislation on Fraud, Kidnapping, Murder, Rape, Extortion ? How will we ever survive ? Smh .
You are talking about folks who take the defense of their lives as a personal responsibility. Also the most law abiding people in this country. Y’all want the state to protect everyone. Just so you know, that has a very poor track record.The 2A fanatics are too scared to be sensible or even responsible.
I’m disappointed all the time when I ask people if they view it as the government’s responsibility to guarantee their safety and whether they have any responsibility in the matter or not. Then it’s immediately followed up by “but what happens if they aren’t there to protect you at the moment your life is in danger and you need them the most in that regard?” Ive never gotten a straight answer other than they acknowledge they are toast.You are talking about folks who take the defense of their lives as a personal responsibility. Also the most law abiding people in this country. Y’all want the state to protect everyone. Just so you know, that has a very poor track record.
Actually the concept of self defense, or personal defense of life and liberty, is reasonably closely related to the concept of deterrence of an oppressive government from encroachment on life and liberty that the two responses normally both apply I’d submit. I’m sure a few don’t know the difference, but it isn’t everyone on here who uses both of those replies.What annoys me more than the "guns are bad" people are the "it's to protect my home and person" people. It shows that many people in this country dont know the true purpose of the 2A making guns bans even more probable in our future.
I would call self defense a subcategory of it but its imperative to understand that without the right, we are subject to become Venezuela.Actually the concept of self defense, or personal defense of life and liberty, is reasonably closely related to the concept of deterrence of an oppressive government from encroachment on life and liberty that the two responses normally both apply I’d submit. I’m sure a few don’t know the difference, but it isn’t everyone on here who uses both of those replies.
Lots of folks don’t understand the meaning of an Inalienable right. They’ll just as quickly point out that the 2a says “well regulated” thinking they can be regulated. When you point out “Shall not be infringed” they want to change the subject. That’s what an inalienable right means, it cannot be taken away.I would call self defense a subcategory of it but its imperative to understand that without the right, we are subject to become Venezuela.
I'm also not calling out any posters. it's something I see often though.