Gun control debate (merged)

#11,851
#11,851
McDad said:
I also get testy when someone thinks their opinion which is shared by some in power or seeking power supercedes my constitutional rights. Luther has a right to his opinion. He does not have any right to my liberty.
Click to expand...
What constitutional rights are those? The right to walk into McDonald's with two automatics slung over your shoulders?
Or was it the right to mount anti-aircraft guns on your back porch? Maybe it's the right to sell guns to kids out of the trunk of your car? I get confused. (intended opening)
 
#11,853
#11,853

This guy that I’ve talked to is from FAYETTEVILLE Ark. he is going. I know a lot of people from Mississippi has already left for Virginia. There is a lot of people all across the country going, so I hope these people stay armed, so they can be safe.
 
#11,854
#11,854
luthervol said:
What constitutional rights are those? The right to walk into McDonald's with two automatics slung over your shoulders?
Or was it the right to mount anti-aircraft guns on your back porch? Maybe it's the right to sell guns to kids out of the trunk of your car? I get confused. (intended opening)
Click to expand...
Literally no one is doing two of those three things and the third is already illegal.
now please answer in a logical non-emotional way how limiting the legal purchase of firearms is an answer to anything
 
#11,855
#11,855
luthervol said:
I asked another poster a little earlier today to list just 2 or 3 freedoms that have been taken away from gun lovers over the past 40 years (after he claimed that the left had done nothing but strip their rights over that time period).
He never responded.
I'll ask everyone.
What rights have you lost over the past 40 years?
Click to expand...
What rights have you?
 
#11,856
#11,856
Orange defense said:

This guy that I’ve talked to is from FAYETTEVILLE Ark. he is going. I know a lot of people from Mississippi has already left for Virginia. There is a lot of people all across the country going, so I hope these people stay armed, so they can be safe.
Click to expand...
VCDL says take one for the team? 😮
 
#11,857
#11,857
McDad said:
Because you believe yourself to be reasonable. But your reasoning isnt applied to all rights equally. Truth is youre emotional about this issue.
Click to expand...
I think rationality and reasonableness should be applied to all rights equally.....which in no way means the conclusions will be the same. Quite the opposite.
I have no problem with speeding fines being increased in school zones and construction areas. Do you?
Now apply your consistency test.
 
#11,858
#11,858
luthervol said:
Personally, and I've stated this before, my goals would be:
Fewer guns produced, purchased, and owned.
Limits on types of guns that can be purchased.
Limits on number that can be purchased in given time periods.
None of which infringe on any 2a rights.
Click to expand...
No. Just every other basic right we have.

It's not just the 2a
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and McDad
#11,859
#11,859
luthervol said:
I think rationality and reasonableness should be applied to all rights equally.....which in no way means the conclusions will be the same. Quite the opposite.
I have no problem with speeding fines being increased in school zones and construction areas. Do you?
Now apply your consistency test.
Click to expand...
Still waiting on a logical response to my questions to you
 
#11,861
#11,861
McDad said:
I also get testy when someone thinks their opinion which is shared by some in power or seeking power supercedes my constitutional rights. Luther has a right to his opinion. He does not have any right to my liberty.
Click to expand...
Kinda why there is no such thing as collective rights. The smallest minority is the individual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, davethevol and McDad
#11,863
#11,863
Rickyvol77 said:
Still waiting on a logical response to my questions to you
Click to expand...
It will decrease the number of guns in the hands of criminals.
And I'm not debating that point. I know it to be true - I assume you will claim to know it to be untrue...proverbial impasse.
 
#11,865
#11,865
luthervol said:
It will decrease the number of guns in the hands of criminals.
And I'm not debating that point. I know it to be true - I assume you will claim to know it to be untrue...proverbial impasse.
Click to expand...
No it wouldn’t. I’ve been in law enforcement for 20 plus years and know you are simply wrong on that. It would have practically no effect on criminal behavior. It would only affect law abiding persons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#11,867
#11,867
Rickyvol77 said:
No it wouldn’t. I’ve been in law enforcement for 20 plus years and know you are simply wrong on that. It would have practically no effect on criminal behavior. It would only affect law abiding persons.
Click to expand...
Sure it would. Proverbial impasse.
Give the breakdown of the origins of the guns recovered that were used in the commission of a crime.
 
#11,868
#11,868
luthervol said:
I think rationality and reasonableness should be applied to all rights equally.....which in no way means the conclusions will be the same. Quite the opposite.
I have no problem with speeding fines being increased in school zones and construction areas. Do you?
Now apply your consistency test.
Click to expand...
I dont possess the Constitutional right to automobile, standardized fines, or speed limits.

I do possess the right to bear arms and the others i asked you to comment on.

My consistency is reasonable. Yours is not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and Rickyvol77
#11,869
#11,869
luthervol said:
No you shouldn't.
Look, we've identified a point of disagreement.
2a does not grant you that right nor is it rational or reasonable to expect that right.
Click to expand...
Why is it not rational or reasonable? What if it's two muskets a day?

You constantly rail against your made up assault weapons. Do you fear all guns the same?

Do you irrationally fear a musket the same as a fully semi automatic assault weapon of war? Is it reasonable to treat your fear the same as someone with a rational understanding of an inanimate object?

You suffer from acute paranoia. Indeed it's even a mass epidemic. Akin to any torch wielding mob your fears are fed off of ignorance rather than reason. And you lash out at the manufactured monster in an effort to assuage your irrational and unreasonable fears.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and McDad
#11,870
#11,870
luthervol said:
What constitutional rights are those? The right to walk into McDonald's with two automatics slung over your shoulders?
Or was it the right to mount anti-aircraft guns on your back porch? Maybe it's the right to sell guns to kids out of the trunk of your car? I get confused. (intended opening)
Click to expand...
I do have a right to carry arms into McDonald's. Who is harmed or violated if i do? McDonald's has a right to establish rules to bar entry. It is up to me to acquiesce or go elsewhere.
Why should i not possess anti aircraft guns if i can afford them?
Kids do not enjoy all the rights of adults so this question is the worst of the 3.
 
#11,871
#11,871
luthervol said:
Sure it would. Proverbial impasse.
Give the breakdown of the origins of the guns recovered that were used in the commission of a crime.
Click to expand...
Most guns used in crimes are gained illegally yes. And it has little to do with regular gun owners buying more than one a month. It’s not an impasse because I use legal and logical and practical thinking. You simply think the possession, purchasing or total numbers of guns leads to crime.
 
#11,873
#11,873
His thinking makes no sense. It’s like restricting the number of times someone can text or post or publish papers in a month’s time. Restricts a constitutional right for no impact to criminal behavior at all
 
#11,874
#11,874
Rickyvol77 said:
His thinking makes no sense. It’s like restricting the number of times someone can text or post or publish papers in a month’s time. Restricts a constitutional right for no impact to criminal behavior at all
Click to expand...
Speech, press, worship are all rights which can, and have, harmed. And yet the only limits advocated are targeted to one amendment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#11,875
#11,875
McDad said:
I do have a right to carry arms into McDonald's. Who is harmed or violated if i do? McDonald's has a right to establish rules to bar entry. It is up to me to acquiesce or go elsewhere.
Why should i not possess anti aircraft guns if i can afford them?
Kids do not enjoy all the rights of adults so this question is the worst of the 3.
Click to expand...
1. Change it from McDonald's to the public library, park, or court house.
2. I would love to assume the question is rhetorical but I'm afraid you might be at least a little serious.
Ummmmm, let me see, because the risk to others is deemed to far exceed the right of the individual.
3. Adults are not allowed to enter public schools visibly armed with knives and or guns.
Again, society in its wisdom, has deemed the rights of the one to be greatly outweighed by the risk to the many.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top