Gun control debate (merged)

#13,928
#13,928
NorthDallas40 said:
Now you’re ignoring the information in the link I provided. I thought you were interested in honest discussion? Turns out that only applies if we are willing to accept your incorrect argument premise.
Click to expand...

It’s only incorrect to you because you don’t like it.
 
#13,929
#13,929
OHvol40 said:
Lol how am I misinterpreting a statement? I didn’t change the words. They are there, I know some people wish they weren’t, but they are.
Click to expand...

A well regulated what ? And you left out telling us about the most important little ink mark that’s ever been placed on a piece of parchment .. that “COMMA”
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols, DynaLo and hog88
#13,930
#13,930
OHvol40 said:
It’s not irrelevant, just answer the question.
Click to expand...
Rickyvol already answered it. You’re pushing homicide while ignoring suicide. And yes what you want will require a constitutional amendment as the interpretation of “well regulated militia” you are pushing has already been struck down by SCOTUS.

You bring nothing new to this discussion. And nobody counter to you in this discussion is interested in any more regulation.

What else ya got?
 
#13,933
#13,933
OHvol40 said:
Why would you remove suicides? What is “not that much different”?
Click to expand...
Because they are irrelevant in one individual oppressing another individuals rights.

What was it you said above, just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t true or something like that?

What else ya got?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols, 37L1, SpaceCoastVol and 1 other person
#13,935
#13,935
OHvol40 said:
All that says is there are differing opinions on the interpretation of the language. We knew that already. Don’t see the point?
Click to expand...
The majority ruling is all that applies. And it says your interpretation is incorrect.

What else ya got? Thus far you’re batting 0.000
 
#13,936
#13,936
OHvol40 said:
Be careful you don’t break a leg trying to sidestep issues so hard.

One, I “assume people’s natural inclination is to shoot someone” because they do. It happens... it actually happens a lot in this country. So you can just drop this “assumption” because it is not an assumption, it’s a fact.

Two, I have not once advocated to “punish” anyone who has proven that they can be a responsible gun owner. So, in my view, the only people who should worry about being able to own a gun are the ones who have clearly proven they are not responsible humans. Do you have a traceable pattern of misconduct that would call your judgement into question? If not, then nobody cares if you have guns.
Click to expand...

You completely ignored the part I said about existing city and states that have the toughest gun laws in the country and have failed to stop the crimes . That’s because more gun laws don’t solve the problem you are talking about .
 
#13,937
#13,937
0nelilreb said:
A well regulated what ? And you left out telling us about the most important little ink mark that’s ever been placed on a piece of parchment .. that “COMMA”
Click to expand...

You’re right, that clearly nullifies the phrase “well regulated”
 
#13,940
#13,940
NorthDallas40 said:
Because they are irrelevant in one individual oppressing another individuals rights.

What was it you said above, just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t true or something like that?

What else ya got?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, rights are “oppressed” all the time when there is a clear detriment to public well-being.

Nobody trying to decent actually wants to have an honest conversation because I ask simple questions like: how do compare to other developed countries on gun violence stats? No straight forward answer, because those are realities that people choose to ignore.
 
#13,941
#13,941
OHvol40 said:
Just to be clear, rights are “oppressed” all the time when there is a clear detriment to public well-being.

Nobody trying to decent actually wants to have an honest conversation because I ask simple questions like: how do compare to other developed countries on gun violence stats? No straight forward answer, because those are realities that people choose to ignore.
Click to expand...

As in?
 
#13,943
#13,943
OHvol40 said:
Just to be clear, rights are “oppressed” all the time when there is a clear detriment to public well-being.

Nobody trying to decent actually wants to have an honest conversation because I ask simple questions like: how do compare to other developed countries on gun violence stats? No straight forward answer, because those are realities that people choose to ignore.
Click to expand...

That’s a statist justification for the government to wrongly oppress the citizens. It’s wrong. The government has no authority to oppress the people’s natural rights.

Still 0.000. What eise ya got?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols and 0nelilreb
#13,944
#13,944
NorthDallas40 said:
The majority ruling is all that applies. And it says your interpretation is incorrect.

What else ya got? Thus far you’re batting 0.000
Click to expand...

Lol according to you. Every time I ask a simple question your answer is “irrelevant” because it’s something you don’t want to talk about. Disqualifying facts because you don’t what they say is disingenuous. How do you have an honest discussion with someone who ignores facts? You can’t.
 
#13,945
#13,945
0nelilreb said:
You completely ignored the part I said about existing city and states that have the toughest gun laws in the country and have failed to stop the crimes . That’s because more gun laws don’t solve the problem you are talking about .
Click to expand...

Ok, so why are other countries so much better? Do their imaginary lines not matter too, or is that inconvenient?
 
#13,946
#13,946
NorthDallas40 said:
Irrelevant to the end you desire. It will require a constitutional amendment. And the people you are trying to convince are not interested in one.
Click to expand...

The gun violence problem in the US is a just a symptom of a larger problem within our society. There is no easy or clear solution to that societal problem, but I know any "solution" that aims specifically for reducing gun violence will inevitable infringe on my right to bear arms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols, DynaLo, 0nelilreb and 1 other person
#13,947
#13,947
OHvol40 said:
Lol according to you. Every time I ask a simple question your answer is “irrelevant” because it’s something you don’t want to talk about. Disqualifying facts because you don’t what they say is disingenuous. How do you have an honest discussion with someone who ignores facts? You can’t.
Click to expand...

You just got through misinterpreting the 2a to use it for your benefit and now you what to be honest ? Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#13,948
#13,948
OHvol40 said:
Lol according to you. Every time I ask a simple question your answer is “irrelevant” because it’s something you don’t want to talk about. Disqualifying facts because you don’t what they say is disingenuous. How do you have an honest discussion with someone who ignores facts? You can’t.
Click to expand...
That’s because you keep bringing up irrelevant points and refuse to accept we are not interested in discussion with you on what other rights we should give up willingly. You keep bringing up irrelevant or out right incorrect point after point. You ignore it when it’s pointed out to you and just keep repeating yourself.

You bring nothing new to this and are still 0.000. What else ya got... that’s new?
 
#13,949
#13,949
Pepe_Silvia said:
The gun violence problem in the US is a just a symptom of a larger problem within our society. There is no easy or clear solution to that societal problem, but I know any "solution" that aims specifically for reducing gun violence will inevitable infringe on my right to bear arms.
Click to expand...
Yep.
 
#13,950
#13,950
NorthDallas40 said:
Scalia and McReynolds says it does. The prefatory clause does not stand alone and cannot over rule the operative clause. “Shall not be infringed.”

Still 0.000. What else ya got?
Click to expand...

What do the other justices say? You stand behind their interpretations too, or only the ones you agree with?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top