Gun control debate (merged)

[hndog609]

Again, that’s your condition, not mine. If you aren’t interested in responding to my inquiry, then don’t.

If you aren't interested in knowing the flaws in your inquiry quit pretending you do.

 

[OHvol40]

Collective bargaining is different than the unions the right alledgely takes issue with. Unions do far far more than bargain for their people, which is where the issues come in.

And so do 2A advocates, that’s not the point.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Interesting... that says a lot.

Specifically the high capacity magazine ban has been ruled unconstitutional by the 9th. And SCOTUS has recently upheld a recent similar 9th decision.

 

[VolStrom]

Interesting... that says a lot.

I wonder if any judge in the 9th circuit has ever held a job, picked up hay in a field or fired a gun?

 

[OHvol40]

Exactly... it didn't add up or connect logically. That's why you got the answers you got.

I got the answers I got (predictably) because it confuses many modern people who don’t understand the similar history of both but don’t support both.

 

[OHvol40]

And again, one is a choice (joining a union) the other is a right (2A).

How hard is that for you to understand?

Actually owning a firearm and joining a Union are both choices. Both are, and should be, maintained as pillars of this society.

 

[Orangeslice13]

If you aren't interested in knowing the flaws in your inquiry quit pretending you do.

He doesn’t want to talk about his premise being flawed. You’re supposed to just accept it and move on

 

[Orangeslice13]

I got the answers I got (predictably) because it confuses many modern people who don’t understand the similar history of both but don’t support both.

You’ve still haven’t established both as still necessary

 

[OHvol40]

So you label people while saying you are not the one labeling. Do you have a link to or supporting evidence for these people who defend the 2A while Being active In trying to end unions?

I defend the 2a vigorously while at the same time view unions as no longer necessary as their need has been replaced by some government agency. If people want to join they’re free to do so but it should not be required to work at the company. Many studies now indicate that unions are actually harmful to their membership. So again I ask should union shops be allowed?

Government agencies replace unions the same way the US military replaces the 2nd amendment lol. That is an absurd stance.

 

[Orangeslice13]

I wonder if any judge in the 9th circuit has ever held a job, picked up hay in a field or fired a gun?

They don’t have too. They defended the constitution correctly and threw out California’s capacity ban.

 

[C-south]

I chose to focus on people who support 2A as absolutists while simultaneously being anti-union, I never made a sweeping statement about every conservative believing one way or another. I’m just interested in people who DO think this way, what is the justification. You’re the one handing out labels, not me.

There’s no use for unions anymore, they serve no viable purpose other than serving themselves. There’s plenty of protections in place for workers at the state and federal level.

 

[VolStrom]

They don’t have too. They defended the constitution correctly and threw out California’s capacity ban.

So 1 in 6 rulings that aren't overturned make them okay?

 

[C-south]

Government agencies replace unions the same way the US military replaces the 2nd amendment lol. That is an absurd stance.

Yes, this is absurd.

 

[OHvol40]

There’s no use for unions anymore, they serve no viable purpose other than serving themselves. There’s plenty of protections in place for workers at the state and federal level.

If that is what you believe then by the same logic police and military replace your need to own a firearm.

 

[C-south]

Actually owning a firearm and joining a Union are both choices. Both are, and should be, maintained as pillars of this society.

Except one is a fundamental right and the other is not.

 

[C-south]

If that is what you believe then by the same logic police and military replace your need to own a firearm.

No they don’t. I don’t have police or military with me every minute of the day. The 2A exists for multiple reasons regardless.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Government agencies replace unions the same way the US military replaces the 2nd amendment lol. That is an absurd stance.

Is it.
The 2a protests the individual against personal threats which include the a potential tyrannical government.

Does the union protect the individuals in the same manner?
What do unions do that the government doesn’t?
Safety?
Unfair labor?
How does the union help the individual?

 

[Orangeslice13]

So 1 in 6 rulings that aren't overturned make them okay?

It puts the debate squarely at the feet of SCOTUS. And their decision Is written in a pretty decisive way in support of the 2A. That’s the point

 

[OHvol40]

Except one is a fundamental right and the other is not.

Ok, why?

 

[OHvol40]

Is it.
The 2a protests the individual against personal threats which include the a potential tyrannical government.

Does the union protect the individuals in the same manner?
What do unions do that the government doesn’t?
Safety?
Unfair labor?
How does the union help the individual?

It helps the individual by protecting them from unfair labor practices, monopolizing everyday life including wages, food, goods, housing, etc.

 

[Orangeslice13]

If that is what you believe then by the same logic police and military replace your need to own a firearm.

How so?

 

[OHvol40]

No they don’t. I don’t have police or military with me every minute of the day. The 2A exists for multiple reasons regardless.

You mean you like to have a personal say in your own protection rather than having a branch of government that does it for you?

 

[Orangeslice13]

It helps the individual by protecting them from unfair labor practices, monopolizing everyday life including wages, food, goods, housing, etc.

There was a time when unions prevented all those things. Give me an example of any of those issues that are possible today without the union

 

[OHvol40]

How so?

Because you’re giving up your personal liberty and trusting it to the government. What do you mean how so? It’s almost rhetorical.

 

[C-south]

You mean you like to have a personal say in your own protection rather than having a branch of government that does it for you?

Just like I can choose who I work for.