"no one is coming to take your guns"

Mott the Hoople said:
I'd defy you to show them to me. Where are they? I don't know one single person...NOT ONE...who would agree to that. Where are these people who want to implement European style gun control. Show them to me. I'm considered pretty far on the left here and I almost every friend I have owns a gun, many have CC permits. Where are these people you are talking about? Show them to me.
Click to expand...

Topspin, BAC, poet are THREE people on this damned board. You're being deliberately ignorant.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Thank you for proving my point. The NFA was passed in 1934. Now just 80 years later you still pretty much have the same right to bear arms. There have been small advances in gun control that have then been rolled back.

I don't doubt that there are some people who would outlaw all guns, but they are a small group without much political power. That they have different laws in NYC than the middle of nowhere West Texas is not surprising or much reason for concern.

There is less of a rational reason for NYC to have differing 4th amendment standards (e.g., stop and frisk).
Click to expand...

Oh you support the NFA as well? I bet you support the illegally passed Hughes amendment as well. I'm starting to think Grind was right about those fake Libertarian claims.
 
leaningright said:
Look no further than our very own Topspin. Then you can look to his now Senator Feinstein. If you aren't seeing these people and their attitude toward private gun ownership you are willfully blind.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a fair assessment of Topper at all. The fact that he pokes fun at the irrational and religious reverence towards guns of some doesn't mean he's "anti-gun" at all. The fact that he points out some cold hard facts about guns that you may not like doesn't mean you can dismiss those facts because "He wants to take your guns." He doesn't. He's trying to make you think.

In fact this near religious worship of guns is what puts off and frustrates many about gun enthusiast. Particularly the right wing NRA trailer park crowd.

The fact that we want to have a discussion about implementing common sense methods to keep nut jobs from having access to military style weapons so they can't gun down elementary school kids doesn't mean we want to take your guns or that we want European style gun control or that we don't believe in 2nd amendment rights. That is complete nonsense and what it really shows is the irrational border line fanaticism of some gun enthusiast.

The fact that we don't want wack jobs having access to military style weapons doesn't mean we want to take your guns away. The fact that we don't want to live our lives in an armed camp or in fear doesn't mean we want to take anyones arms away. The slippery slope argument the NRA and their supporters present speaks more to fanaticism than it does to gun advocacy. The fact that you don't feel safe going to a public place such as a movie theater, unless your packing heat, speaks to far greater social problems that need to be addressed than anything ever having to do with guns. None of that means that anyone wants to take your guns away or implement European style gun control or violate anyones 2nd amendment rights.

We simply want to be able to go to a movie or send our kids to school without some total nutjob, showing up with enough armaments to break the siege of Bastogne cause...well...it's not Bastogne! That and most of us don't believe that the answer to gun violence is more guns.

The NRA's slippery slope argument that any common sense methods that deny the mentally insane and criminals easy access to military style weapons will open the gate to taking our guns is utter nonsense. Something can be done to prevent these tragedies happening and more guns is not the answer. That's treating the symptom and not the problem.
 
Cave Johnson said:
Topspin, BAC, poet are THREE people on this damned board. You're being deliberately ignorant.
Click to expand...
No, you are being deliberately obtuse and a fanatic. Not one of those people have advocated European style gun controls. All they have done is used facts to point out your fanaticism.

Your a gun enthusiast...we get that...more power to you.

What we want is an adult conversation on how to prevent violence and tragedies. That doesn't equate to taking anyones guns away.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I don't think that's a fair assessment of Topper at all. The fact that he pokes fun at the irrational and religious reverence towards guns of some doesn't mean he's "anti-gun" at all. The fact that he points out some cold hard facts about guns that you may not like doesn't mean you can dismiss those facts because "He wants to take your guns." He doesn't. He's trying to make you think.
Click to expand...
We can't help you if you're being this deliberately ignorant.

In fact this near religious worship of guns is what puts off and frustrates many about gun enthusiast. Particularly the right wing NRA trailer park crowd.
Click to expand...
Yes, wanting to maintain our human rights is clearly a sign of a bad person.

The fact that we want to have a discussion about implementing common sense methods to keep nut jobs from having access to military style weapons so they can't gun down elementary school kids doesn't mean we want to take your guns or that we want European style gun control or that we don't believe in 2nd amendment rights. That is complete nonsense and what it really shows is the irrational border line fanaticism of some gun enthusiast.
Click to expand...
Except none was proposed, and you seem to think that all rights exist in a vacuum, where precedent won't get worse or this be used as precedent to infringe upon other rights. No, it'll work out just the way you want with no negative consequences whatsoever. And WE'RE the irrational ones.

The fact that we don't want wack jobs having access to military style weapons doesn't mean we want to take your guns away.
Click to expand...
Stop. Right now. You don't know shit if you're going to keep using loaded, meaningless terms like that.
The fact that we don't want to live our lives in an armed camp or in fear doesn't mean we want to take anyones arms away.
Click to expand...
I don't hear you voicing displeasure with any of the NY or CA or NJ or CT or HI or CO laws that were passed. I don't see you fighting against confiscatory measures when they're proposed. So if 'you' don't want to do something, you sure aren't fighting to see that it doesn't happen
The slippery slope argument the NRA and their supporters present speaks more to fanaticism than it does to gun advocacy.
Click to expand...
Both here and abroad the slippery slope argument is grounded in historical fact.
The fact that you don't feel safe going to a public place such as a movie theater, unless your packing heat, speaks to far greater social problems that need to be addressed than anything ever having to do with guns.
Click to expand...
So you're worried about mass-shooters and want to restrict hundreds of millions of peoples rights based on several events that when all is said an done don't even affect .01% of the population, but wanting to defend ones self from said people (and every other type of criminal) is paranoid? Ok there buddy, that's logical.
None of that means that anyone wants to take your guns away or implement European style gun control or violate anyones 2nd amendment rights.
Click to expand...
Again, the head of the fucking Senate Judiciary committee said they wanted to. Mr and Mrs. America Turn Em All In. But you'll be deliberately ignorant about that too. I'll bet money on it.

We simply want to be able to go to a movie or send our kids to school without some total nutjob, showing up with enough armaments to break the siege of Bastogne cause...well...it's not Bastogne! That and most of us don't believe that the answer to gun violence is more guns.
Click to expand...
So when WE worry about protecting ourselves, it's paranoid. But when you do it (in a way that affects everyone not just yourselves, unlike our chosen method), it's good and rational? No, fuck you.

The NRA's slippery slope argument that any common sense methods that deny the mentally insane and criminals easy access to military style weapons will open the gate to taking our guns is utter nonsense. Something can be done to prevent these tragedies happening and more guns is not the answer. That's treating the symptom and not the problem.
Click to expand...
That fact that you so casually brush off the idea of infringing upon hundreds of millions of Americans Constitutional rights is an even greater problem, and one that we are rightly more concerned about.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No, you are being deliberately obtuse and a fanatic. Not one of those people have advocated European style gun controls. All they have done is used facts to point out your fanaticism.
Your a gun enthusiast...we get that...more power to you.

What we want is an adult conversation on how to prevent violence and tragedies. That doesn't equate to taking anyones guns away.
Click to expand...
You clearly haven't read any of their posts on the subject then. I'm sorry, you're willingly ignorant on the matter at hand.
 
Cave Johnson said:
We can't help you if you're being this deliberately ignorant.

Yes, wanting to maintain our human rights is clearly a sign of a bad person.

Except none was proposed, and you seem to think that all rights exist in a vacuum, where precedent won't get worse or this be used as precedent to infringe upon other rights. No, it'll work out just the way you want with no negative consequences whatsoever. And WE'RE the irrational ones.

Stop. Right now. You don't know shit if you're going to keep using loaded, meaningless terms like that.
I don't hear you voicing displeasure with any of the NY or CA or NJ or CT or HI or CO laws that were passed. I don't see you fighting against confiscatory measures when they're proposed. So if 'you' don't want to do something, you sure aren't fighting to see that it doesn't happen
Both here and abroad the slippery slope argument is grounded in historical fact.
So you're worried about mass-shooters and want to restrict hundreds of millions of peoples rights based on several events that when all is said an done don't even affect .01% of the population, but wanting to defend ones self from said people (and every other type of criminal) is paranoid? Ok there buddy, that's logical.
Again, the head of the fucking Senate Judiciary committee said they wanted to. Mr and Mrs. America Turn Em All In. But you'll be deliberately ignorant about that too. I'll bet money on it.

So when WE worry about protecting ourselves, it's paranoid. But when you do it (in a way that affects everyone not just yourselves, unlike our chosen method), it's good and rational? No, fuck you.

That fact that you so casually brush off the idea of infringing upon hundreds of millions of Americans Constitutional rights is an even greater problem, and one that we are rightly more concerned about.
Click to expand...
LOL Thanks for making my point for me! LOL
 
Cave Johnson said:
You clearly haven't read any of their posts on the subject then. I'm sorry, you're willingly ignorant on the matter at hand.
Click to expand...
No. You're deliberately obtuse and a fanatic and are unwilling to even have a rational discussion. To top that off, you're collosially naïve about the issue.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No. You're deliberately obtuse and a fanatic and are unwilling to even have a rational discussion. To top that off, you're collosially naïve about the issue.
Click to expand...

Oh really? I'm unwilling to have a mature conversation about the the issue? And how might that be Mott? Because I believe that any infringement of a human right is a bad thing? What is 'immature' or 'irrational' about that? Please then, offer me this supposed rational solution that has been proposed, as I have yet to see it. I mean, I've only been involved in this sort of debate for 16 years or so, I guess I wouldn't have a wealth of information on it or anything.
 
Cave Johnson said:
Yes, stellar refutation of the points I've made Mott. "Hurr Durr".
Click to expand...
What points? You didn't make any points. A fanatical rant isn't making a point. You didn't even address my points. You went off on an irrelevant fanatical rant and deriving conclusions from points you made up. Not the points I made. Get real.

I have simply made two factual points and you can't deal with them.

#1. We want an intelligent adult discussion on how to prevent the insane from accessing large capacity military style weapons. Not dismissive rants of "you don't know what your talking about." from a fanatic.

#2. We don't want to live in an armed camp. You may either prefer that or like that or feel scared enough to need it. The rest of us don't. We want our right to defend ourselves but we don't want to live in your paramilitary society.

Deal with it.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
What points? You didn't make any points. A fanatical rant isn't making a point. You didn't even address my points. You went off on an irrelevant fanatical rant and deriving conclusions from points you made up. Get real.

I have simply made two factual points and you can't deal with them.

#1. We want an intelligent adult discussion on how to prevent the insane from accessing large capacity military style weapons. Not dismissive rants of "you don't know what your talking about." from a fanatic.
Click to expand...
OK Mott, then describe it. Describe it in the clearest legal language. Please, show me, a firearms expert, what a "Large capacity military style" firearm is.

#2. We don't want to live in an armed camp. You may either prefer that or like that or feel scared enough to need it. The rest of us don't. We want our right to defend ourselves but we don't want to live in your paramilitary society.

Deal with it.
Click to expand...
I thought you said you wanted a rational, adult conversation. This isn't it.
 
Mott wants to make national laws that infringe upon the rights of millions of peoples based on incidents that affect 0.000001% of the population during any given year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top