Gun control debate (merged)

#22,526
#22,526
OHvol40 said:
Still, the fact remains that his logic is flawed as evidenced by the counterpoint created by these facts, which are just a few of the many of such examples that point out that the “right to defend myself” is defended much more vigorously than other rights regardless of consequence… and that normally people prefer to address real problems in lieu of indulging in unfettered hobbies.
Click to expand...
So is it a right or a hobby? Because you jump back and forth here. Which is part of the problem.

And yes, once the right to defend oneself is gone, the others will be quickly behind it, so it is treated differently by us.

We have already seen calls to treat the unvaccinated differently. The president has "joked" about republicans being arrested, on live tv with Kimmel. The debate isnt are we on a slippery slope, but how far down are we, and how far is acceptable?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, StarRaider, AM64 and 3 others
#22,527
#22,527
LouderVol said:
So is it a right or a hobby? Because you jump back and forth here. Which is part of the problem.

And yes, once the right to defend oneself is gone, the others will be quickly behind it, so it is treated differently by us.

We have already seen calls to treat the unvaccinated differently. The president has "joked" about republicans being arrested, on live tv with Kimmel. The debate isnt are we on a slippery slope, but how far down are we, and how far is acceptable?
Click to expand...
Speaking in hyperbole like there are actually people who want to take away your right to defend yourself is about as disingenuous as a position gets. Nobody wants that.

Personally, what I want, is for every gun owner to treat that responsibility with the seriousness that I do… and if I feel like that isn’t the case then I can advocate for rules to try to make it so. I’m not sorry for feeling that way.
 
#22,528
#22,528
OHvol40 said:
Speaking in hyperbole like there are actually people who want to take away your right to defend yourself is about as disingenuous as a position gets. Nobody wants that.

Personally, what I want, is for every gun owner to treat that responsibility with the seriousness that I do… and if I feel like that isn’t the case then I can advocate for rules to try to make it so. I’m not sorry for feeling that way.
Click to expand...

Better get to it, amending the constitution take time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, 85SugarVol, UT_Dutchman and 5 others
#22,529
#22,529
OHvol40 said:
Speaking in hyperbole like there are actually people who want to take away your right to defend yourself is about as disingenuous as a position gets. Nobody wants that.

Personally, what I want, is for every gun owner to treat that responsibility with the seriousness that I do… and if I feel like that isn’t the case then I can advocate for rules to try to make it so. I’m not sorry for feeling that way.
Click to expand...
Kyle Ritenhouse says there are plenty of people who dont think you should be able to defend yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, 85SugarVol, midnight orange and 4 others
#22,530
#22,530
0nelilreb said:
The lack of understanding of this concept from the “ we need to do something now about gun violence crowd “ just baffles the sh!t out of me . It’s truly amazing to me how they intentionally ignore all statics except those having to do with firearms and point those out like they are the real problem . Any legitimate source you want to look up from any country has firearm related deaths falling into two categories, Suicide and Violence . Anyone with two functioning brain cells can look up these stats per country and see where they fall . I’m going to help our brain cell challenged friends out by providing a per country break down of the top 50 leading causes of death , I know they aren’t going to look at it because it destroys their omg our guns are killing everybody agenda , but here it is anyway . Look at where Suicide and Violence is per country and explain how it’s not a people problem .
LEADING CAUSES OF DEATH BY COUNTRY

Edit : interesting side stat from looking at these countries .. Mexico has a high violence rate ( expected ) but a lower suicide rate than most countries .
Click to expand...

What if we looked at the mindset of mass shooters? Some appear to be suicidal themselves - they just want to take others on the trip with them. Again the weapon is simply the tool, The mind behind the weapon is the key element whether it's suicidal (potentially with an interest in harming others, too) or just malicious, and we'll never get to the real cause as long as people blame the weapon rather than the person. We might very well find that there's a distinct connection to "suicidal" and "violent". Substitute "hate" in the following and it makes a lot of sense how the two may be linked 'Love your neighbor as you love yourself.' You don't get the impression that mass shooters intend or believe they will survive the event; that seems pretty suicidal with the intent of collateral damage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and NurseGoodVol
#22,532
#22,532
0nelilreb said:
@evillawyer come on back and tell us again about how “ studies show “ that having a firearm in your home doesn’t really help you any . Normally I’d prefer to ignore the studies and just ask the ones breaking in so we get it directly from the source , but ummm..
Click to expand...

Vacationing out of the country. Enjoying not being surrounded by gun nuts. Someone this foreign country hasn't trampled the rights of their citizenry. Weird.
 
#22,534
#22,534
evillawyer said:
Vacationing out of the country. Enjoying not being surrounded by gun nuts. Someone this foreign country hasn't trampled the rights of their citizenry. Weird.
Click to expand...
Really, they have all the same rights as us, just sans guns? You want to post up what country so we can point out the differences you are being coy about?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, AM64, InVOLuntary and 2 others
#22,537
#22,537
OHvol40 said:
Speaking in hyperbole like there are actually people who want to take away your right to defend yourself is about as disingenuous as a position gets. Nobody wants that.

Personally, what I want, is for every gun owner to treat that responsibility with the seriousness that I do… and if I feel like that isn’t the case then I can advocate for rules to try to make it so. I’m not sorry for feeling that way.
Click to expand...
We are talking about The right to own guns for self defense…. right? In before “I was only talking about self defense”.

I get it, you aren’t sorry everyone is not you. You’d like more rules that criminals won’t follow.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-117hr7904ih/pdf/BILLS-117hr7904ih.pdf
Guess how many democratic socialists supported this resolution? At least 26 at last count.
There are those wanting to limit access of purchase to a certain period of time or increase reporting of sales. This is the slippery slope we have dealt with for years. It’s insidious. Changing the wording of handguns to firearms in a resolution changes the whole shooting match. Long rifles be damned.
There is no hyperbole about constantly attempting to further narrow the ability to purchase guns as a persons chosen method for self defense. The term gun grabber exists for a reason. ( nobody wants that) They tried several things here in Virginia to do just that, writing laws infringing on the ability to act on my purchasing a gun. Laws that state time limits and number limits are infringement.
The taxing, licensing, reporting, statutes concerning a right that is not to be infringed are work arounds and infringements. They have converted a right to a privilege once you sign that application. After signing you are now subject to all those responsibilities The .gov says you have according to that contract you signed.
To say that no one wants to take away my #1 choice of self defense is hyperbole, intellectually dishonest and globally naïve. The 2A of the constitution after reading all the relevant history surrounding it and the reason it exists has and is being slowly chipped away at for years now. I’ve watched it happen.
There will be more mass shootings with cookie cutter nuts, all cut from the same cloth. They will continue until we have the sought after goal of public disarmament.
That’s just my opinion, guess what, I’m not sorry either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, StarRaider, 0nelilreb and 1 other person
#22,540
#22,540
evillawyer said:
Vacationing out of the country. Enjoying not being surrounded by gun nuts. Someone this foreign country hasn't trampled the rights of their citizenry. Weird.
Click to expand...

That’s odd , history tells us that all governments trample its citizens rights at some point soooo .. what’s the name of this utopian paradise you are visiting ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, davethevol, Rickyvol77 and 2 others
#22,544
#22,544
lawgator1 said:
Under the tortured reading by gun nuts, the phrase about a wel regulated militia is rendered completely moot. The gun nut position is thus at the extreme of irrational.
Click to expand...

Read it to yourself out loud using proper English —-> , < —- and common sense . You are an attorney (supposedly ) so you understand just how important the language is in a document.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and StarRaider
#22,549
#22,549
0nelilreb said:
Read it to yourself out loud using proper English —-> , < —- and common sense . You are an attorney (supposedly ) so you understand just how important the language is in a document.
Click to expand...


I understand that the VERY FIRST RULE of statutory construction is that it is assumed that each part of a statute has meaning, ie is there for a reason. The gun nut position on this is utterly ridiculous because the phrase about a well regulated militia as the reason for the right to keep and bear arms just completely evaporates. The phrase is entirely read out of any significance which makes no sense, at all.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top