Gun control debate (merged)

#7,851
#7,851
@luthervol They will never get past the Me aspect of the 2a and personal responsibility. I'm looking into a 9mm SBR pistol with brace that is outside the NFA. I'm a good guy though and willing to go through the extra scrutiny to determine if i'm a responsible gun owner. The last sentence is where they get hung up.
 
#7,852
#7,852
Mick said:
@luthervol They will never get past the Me aspect of the 2a and personal responsibility. I'm looking into a 9mm SBR pistol with brace that is outside the NFA. I'm a good guy though and willing to go through the extra scrutiny to determine if i'm a responsible gun owner. The last sentence is where they get hung up.
Click to expand...
You don’t need that SBR
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and InVOLuntary
#7,853
#7,853
Mick said:
@luthervol They will never get past the Me aspect of the 2a and personal responsibility. I'm looking into a 9mm SBR pistol with brace that is outside the NFA. I'm a good guy though and willing to go through the extra scrutiny to determine if i'm a responsible gun owner. The last sentence is where they get hung up.
Click to expand...

Only pu$$ies have/carry guns. Welcome to the club.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and joevol33
#7,854
#7,854
Mick said:
@luthervol They will never get past the Me aspect of the 2a and personal responsibility. I'm looking into a 9mm SBR pistol with brace that is outside the NFA. I'm a good guy though and willing to go through the extra scrutiny to determine if i'm a responsible gun owner. The last sentence is where they get hung up.
Click to expand...

I’m not ok with 1 person deciding on whether I can purchase an item or not. And to top that off if that 1 person says no for any reason you almost have no recourse. Sorry if that viewpoint sounds unreasonable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RockyTop85, Pepe_Silvia and InVOLuntary
#7,856
#7,856
hog88 said:
I’m not ok with 1 person deciding on whether I can purchase an item or not. And to top that off if that 1 person says no for any reason you almost have no recourse. Sorry if that viewpoint sounds unreasonable.
Click to expand...
I know exactly where you're coming from, self.
 
#7,861
#7,861
luthervol said:
Guns that are obtained illegally were once purchased legally............that's the problem.
Click to expand...
so in your world the reach around method of hurting citizens rights is the best way to go after the bad guys. You really are banning sober drivers to stop drunk drivers.

A couple things I see wrong with your logic. First being any type of proof of your belief. second, nothing you are proposing would address the actual problem of bad guys with guns. third, is the before mentioned fact that you are going thru the good guys to get to the bad guys. that's just wrong on so many levels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, NorthDallas40, hog88 and 1 other person
#7,862
#7,862
LouderVol said:
so in your world the reach around method of hurting citizens rights is the best way to go after the bad guys. You really are banning sober drivers to stop drunk drivers.

A couple things I see wrong with your logic. First being any type of proof of your belief. second, nothing you are proposing would address the actual problem of bad guys with guns. third, is the before mentioned fact that you are going thru the good guys to get to the bad guys. that's just wrong on so many levels.
Click to expand...
I'm in no way banning sober drivers. I'm supporting laws that reduce the number of people driving drunk.
What I am supporting will most definitely reduce the number of bad guys with guns. Where do you think bad guys get there guns?
I don't feel that any of my proposals puts an undue burden or restriction on any law abiding citizen.
 
#7,864
#7,864
luthervol said:
I'm in no way banning sober drivers. I'm supporting laws that reduce the number of people driving drunk.
What I am supporting will most definitely reduce the number of bad guys with guns. Where do you think bad guys get there guns?
I don't feel that any of my proposals puts an undue burden or restriction on any law abiding citizen.
Click to expand...
but drunk drivers get their cars legally, the only way you are stopping it is to decrease how many cars are out there for people to own legally. because surely that will limit how many cars drunks can get their hands on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and InVOLuntary
#7,865
#7,865
LouderVol said:
but drunk drivers get their cars legally, the only way you are stopping it is to decrease how many cars are out there for people to own legally. because surely that will limit how many cars drunks can get their hands on.
Click to expand...
Another liberal conflict. For open borders making it easier for illegal guns to cross into the country therefore increasing the number of illegal guns, at the same time decreasing the responsible/legal gun purchases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, alwaysvol and tennvols77
#7,867
#7,867
LouderVol said:
but drunk drivers get their cars legally, the only way you are stopping it is to decrease how many cars are out there for people to own legally. because surely that will limit how many cars drunks can get their hands on.
Click to expand...
So the drunk driving / gun comparison is not really a very good one.
 
#7,869
#7,869
NurseGoodVol said:
Is Luther the grey one backed in the corner or the one the owner shaved to look like a poodle?
Click to expand...

I think it could be any of you.

You folks continue to feed him, knowing all along he's nothing but a troll. Your excuse? "I'll make him look dumb!"

Which one is smarter? The one who ignores the idiocy or the one that tries to out idiot the idiot? Watching some of you "prove" how wrong he is is like watching Usain Bolt celebrating winning the gold medal at the Special Olympics.

Eventually, you'll figure out what I figured out a long time ago. The more you feed him, the more idiotic his comments become. He is best ignored.
 
#7,870
#7,870
Grand Vol said:
I think it could be any of you.

You folks continue to feed him, knowing all along he's nothing but a troll. Your excuse? "I'll make him look dumb!"

Which one is smarter? The one who ignores the idiocy or the one that tries to out idiot the idiot? Watching some of you "prove" how wrong he is is like watching Usain Bolt celebrating winning the gold medal at the Special Olympics.

Eventually, you'll figure out what I figured out a long time ago. The more you feed him, the more idiotic his comments become. He is best ignored.
Click to expand...
This is what i just said to my bf....
 
#7,871
#7,871
Grand Vol said:
I think it could be any of you.

You folks continue to feed him, knowing all along he's nothing but a troll. Your excuse? "I'll make him look dumb!"

Which one is smarter? The one who ignores the idiocy or the one that tries to out idiot the idiot? Watching some of you "prove" how wrong he is is like watching Usain Bolt celebrating winning the gold medal at the Special Olympics.

Eventually, you'll figure out what I figured out a long time ago. The more you feed him, the more idiotic his comments become. He is best ignored.
Click to expand...
Meet fire with fire. Our society is unique due to our constitutional protections. It’s needless to compare us to other countries who dont have similar protections. Either you can own a gun or you can’t. If you can own a gun then you should be allowed to buy whatever level of firepower you think is appropriate. So repeal NFA1934 and GCA1968 now. They are over reach within our unique system of laws. 😬
 
#7,872
#7,872
LouderVol said:
but drunk drivers get their cars legally, the only way you are stopping it is to decrease how many cars are out there for people to own legally. because surely that will limit how many cars drunks can get their hands on.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Luther supports a mandate requiring all cars have an alcohol interlock device whether the owner has ever had a DUI or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, SpaceCoastVol and NorthDallas40
#7,874
#7,874
NorthDallas40 said:
Meet fire with fire. Our society is unique due to our constitutional protections. It’s needless to compare us to other countries who dont have similar protections. Either you can own a gun or you can’t. If you can own a gun then you should be allowed to buy whatever level of firepower you think is appropriate. So repeal NFA1934 and GCA1968 now. They are over reach within our unique system of laws. 😬
Click to expand...

Which has what to do with responding to the one upmanship of his comments? I have him on ignore, but I can imagine his posts are getting even more stupid every time one of you replies.

The last four or five pages had been replies to him. And I'd be willing to bet every time someone made a decent post, he came back with something even more absurd than the last post he made. I thought @Septic was the best at suckering people in. Nope.

Learn to let it go. You aren't going to "school" him or win an argument with a troll.
 
#7,875
#7,875
luthervol said:
Not a chance, but I do admire the consistency of your wrongness.
Click to expand...

Why not? It would help in the prevention of drunk driving and save lives. If you're all for placing burdens on law abiding citizens in the hope it would reduce homicides by gun why wouldn't you support interlock devices?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top