Gun control debate (merged)

Politicians, they dupe the voter into believing they support their rights.
Not gonna argue there. I’ve seen too many times these “Principled conservatives” are willing to cave with just a little public pressure, in fear they may lose their precious power.

But for the rest of us little guys, I stand by my original argument.
 
I have two. One got engaged a couple of months ago. She and her fiancé moved to NYC a couple of weeks ago and are moving into an apartment in Manhattan (Chelsea). The other just bought a house in Glenwood Park in Atl with her boyfriend. They both have my view on guns.
That's unfortunate for them.
 
Lion ownership isn’t a constitutional right it’s a privilege granted by government .
That has nothing to do with what Dirty Vol said. He said people never have the right to say how another person defends himself or his family. That's simply not true.
 
That has nothing to do with what Dirty Vol said. He said people never have the right to say how another person defends himself or his family. That's simply not true.

Sure it does , we are in the gun thread and talking to luther about our 2a . Luther isn’t suggesting we are in the gun thread talking about lions, tigers and bears .. is he ? Nah he would try to deflect like that . 😂
 
But what's the point of knowing that? What do you hope to accomplish with the audits? If it's not illegal to have more than 10, why do you need to audit those people?

Because anyone who is buying a gun to sell illegally is not going to have it registered. Instead all you are going to do is hassle law abiding citizens.

Seriously how many of the shooters would you stop with this? The only one I could think of that might have been audited was the Vegas shooter. The rest of these guys bought less than 4 guns at a time, and had less than 10.

This is your typical downward slope slippery slope stance. Propose something that does nothing, and you know would do nothing based on the case evidence. So that later you can turn it to buying two guns or owning 5, then its every time you buy a gun you get audited, be fun to see the government do these audits tens of millions of times a year. And it wouldnt stop anything. We dont need more TSA bs.
The $$$ to run this massive agency would be leveraged as additional gun and ammo ownership taxes. Once again placing an undo burden on people exercising a Constitutional Right. Place the same burden on voting rights, PLEASE!
 
It's never been about safety or lives with any of them. It's about power. The government wants more power. They want the government to have more power so the government will do more for them. They are dependent whether fiscally, morally, or comfort based on the government. They cant accept independence as it directly challenges their dependence and stands in the way of the lies they want to hear.

Because sadly they dont recognize they are in an abusive relationship that because of their self inflicted dependence they are incapable of leaving. They are willing to accept the lies from their abuser because it's easier than dealing with the reality they made for themselves. Better to go along with the abuse and accept worse abuses in the future, than have to work towards their own independence that would grant them the truth they seek from the lies.
Red pill Blue pill..........The Matrix was prophetic.
 
Sure it does , we are in the gun thread and talking to luther about our 2a . Luther isn’t suggesting we are in the gun thread talking about lions, tigers and bears .. is he ? Nah he would try to deflect like that . 😂
Establishing the framework for the conversation.
Plus, I don't believe the 2a ever mentions guns. It says something about a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State and then something else about bear Arms. No one in their right mind defines Arms as any and every type of "gun" that can be created.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't go that far, if you're lumping in Republicans most of them don't believe you have the right to protect your family from the government.

I might refine that to Federally-elected and some state-level Republicans. I'd say the rank and file believe in that right overall. Was this what you meant?
 
Establishing the framework for the conversation.
Plus, I don't believe the 2a ever mentions guns. It says something about a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State and then something else about bear Arms. No one in their right mind defines Arms as any and every type of "gun" that can be created.

When it was written it did so if you don't like it work to amend the constitution of STFU.
 
Establishing the framework for the conversation.
Plus, I don't believe the 2a ever mentions guns. It says something about a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State and then something else about bear Arms. No one in their right mind defines Arms as any and every type of "gun" that can be created.
In terms of the conversation, all guns are arms but not all arms are guns. I would say that the 2A says we should be able to own what we want.
 
The $$$ to run this massive agency would be leveraged as additional gun and ammo ownership taxes. Once again placing an undo burden on people exercising a Constitutional Right. Place the same burden on voting rights, PLEASE!
They would never get through the backlog of the registry itself. Yet alone the first round of audits on people who already had more than 10 guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
Establishing the framework for the conversation.
Plus, I don't believe the 2a ever mentions guns. It says something about a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State and then something else about bear Arms. No one in their right mind defines Arms as any and every type of "gun" that can be created.
Actually it does. That's why they kept it vague. They could have said muskets. But cannons and rifles existed. They could have said pistols, or mentioned a caliber. They could have listed single shot because things like the Puckle Gun had existed for more than 20 years by that point. They didnt want to limit what arms we had access too.

Very strategic turn to hyperbole there. It's almost like the rest says something you dont like and you avoided it.
 
Establishing the framework for the conversation.
Plus, I don't believe the 2a ever mentions guns. It says something about a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State and then something else about bear Arms. No one in their right mind defines Arms as any and every type of "gun" that can be created.

I love it when a career educator conveniently leaves out punctuation from a paragraph when trying to change the authors intent for their own agenda . Our president is on the verge of swaping one of the worlds most deadly “ ARMS dealer” for a basketball player , want to define that for us then apply it to our 2a or should we just keep talking about lions ?
 
Advertisement





Back
Top