Here we go again. More circumventing the 2nd by the Admin

originally posted by: thesaneone
Some of you people crack me up with your support for more gun laws when in reality all gun laws should be removed completely.


Shall not be infringed!


If your a criminal then you are in jail and if you did your time and repaid your debt to society then you should be allowed to live your life like anyone else with no restrictions on your rights, right?

The whole gun 'debate' is ridiculous when one thinks about it.

Cars,knives,baseball bats,chainsaws. prescription drugs are ALL more wide spread than firearms.

ALL are used to kill people.

And yet we don't hear the word 'car violence','knife violence, 'bat violence', and so on.

They only use that made up term for one thing.

One tool.

The big bad evil gun.

That like all of those listed above require someone to be using to be of any threat.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

So according to you, the convicted murderer who did his 25 years should be able to walk out of prison, go to a gun shop, say "One gun please", and he has EVERY right to get that gun?

Wow. I dunno about you, but if a guy did prison time for KILLING other people, I don't want him owning a gun. Old habits die hard. And other humans, well, they die so easily.

Absolutely. removal of rights amounts to a life sentence, and makes of a person less than a citizen. If his crime was heinous enough to warrant a life sentence, then give him one and make it stick, or just kill him and be done with it. A free man ought to be free.

If their rights are to be removed, they should also be exempt from paying any and all taxes. Their taxes are no longer supporting their rights, because their rights have been removed. They are being taxed without representation, because even their right to vote has been removed, ergo, they have no representation.

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Why not I've heard people on this site say once you have paid your debt to society then you should be free to go about business as usual.

And when he goes out with his fresh new piece and murderizes the people that put him away, that's fine too? After all, he paid his debt. He can own guns!

a reply to: intrepid

We have certain rights here. My rights are not trampled on because of the actions of others. See, this is the core of personal responsibility.

The person that commits the crime is the issue. The single individual or individuals are the issue. MY firearms are not.

I know this is difficult for some to grasp, but it is the way it is.

a reply to: introvert

I love the whole "I'm a gun owner" but want more gun restrictions. That is very cute.


What are those stats again for Chicago, NY and LA??? All with the most restricting gun laws.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: nenothtu

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: nenothtu

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy

Ok, so how can you logically compare voter fraud to gun crimes in order to makes some point about regulation or laws?

What is your point?

Because you have already stated that you do not back ID for voting.
Why would you support laws being broken when it simply a matter of checking a valid ID before someone votes?

'Oh, no one dies, so it doesn't matter.' That's your retort.
Well guess what, it does matter.

because its only unconstitutional when when its a law THEY dont like........like voter ID laws

Are you ready to have your mind blown?

I agree with Voter ID laws.

AND I agree with measures to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and the mentally unfit.

What am I?

Are you aware of how easy it is to be labelled as both?

I was almost charged with domestic abuse at one point with a physical altercation with my ex wife, had it not been for the in home camera I had, they would have taken her testimony as gospel and i would now have domestic abuse on my record.....

Again.....things are not that cut and dry

So if things aren't so cut and dry, why not have a national discussion about exactly what kinds of mental disorders, what SORTS of domestic violence would preclude someone from having a firearm? Why not start a discussion on how we can keep guns from the hands of the unfit, instead of just saying "Screw it, arm everyone, let it sort itself out"?

Because, this......

That entire comic is a slippery slope fallacy.

For one, the U.S. already some of the most LAX laws on the books for firearms of any 1st world nation, and they will continue to have this for the foreseeable future. Secondly, as I've said in several posts on this very thread, if the government ACTUALLY tried to disarm the U.S. population, there would be an immediate civil war, and 90% of the military would turn on the government in support of it's citizens. You can claim "gradual this" "slippery slope that", but regardless of how many regulations are put in place, the government can't REDUCE the amount of armed people in country unless they go out and start confiscating firearms. When that happens, civil war. Easy as that.

You're free to express your dismay at your perceived attack by the government on your 2nd amendment rights, but truth be told, unless they come for your guns, they aren't infringing on jack.

It most definitely IS an attack on the 2nd amendment. Read that amendment again, and tell me what part of it leaves room for ANY of the cake to be taken. "Shall not be infringed" is pretty specific in what amount of infringement it will allow.

And forced prayer in school was an infringement of the 1st Amendment rights, but the conservative right didn't complain about that.

I couldn't say. I attended school back in the 60's, but never attended at any point in time where there was any forced prayer. I never saw it happen, even at my age. When was prayer ever forced in schools?

With that said, if it ever DID happen, then you are correct - it was a violation of the 1st Amendment, and it's good they got rid of it before I came along.

I graduated high school in 2001. I grew up in rural New Mexico. Every morning before class, we would stand, say the pledge of allegiance (which strangely has the words "Under God" in it), and then, we'd all sit, bow our heads, and pray.

I told my teachers and principal that I was uncomfortable with the prayer, and they told me I was a godless atheist that needed to find Jesus or I'd go to hell. We reached a compromise. during prayer time, I could stand outside. You know, and basically tell my whole class with that act that I'm a satanist or worse. Forced prayer in schools may not be a common sight in urban schools, but spend ten minutes in the locker room of a rural high school volleyball team before a game.

Strange. their seems to be no force involved in that story. Where was the forced prayer? Why, they even let you exit the room when prayers were going on! Where was the force?

Do you have some strange definition of "force"?

In the sixties and seventies, in urban Ohio and rural Virginia (REAL rural - I still plowed the fields with a horse) there was no forced prayer in my schools. There wasn't any prayer at all, beyond what a kid could sneak in before the exam hit his desk. The pledge of allegiance WAS recited in Ohio - but no one was forced into it. My best friend NEVER said it, ever, up to the day he died. Nor did I - I've never pledged allegiance to ANY flag. That always struck me as illogical. I just haven't died yet, so there's still time, I suppose...

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: thesaneone
Some of you people crack me up with your support for more gun laws when in reality all gun laws should be removed completely.


Shall not be infringed!


If your a criminal then you are in jail and if you did your time and repaid your debt to society then you should be allowed to live your life like anyone else with no restrictions on your rights, right?

The whole gun 'debate' is ridiculous when one thinks about it.

Cars,knives,baseball bats,chainsaws. prescription drugs are ALL more wide spread than firearms.

ALL are used to kill people.

And yet we don't hear the word 'car violence','knife violence, 'bat violence', and so on.

They only use that made up term for one thing.

One tool.

The big bad evil gun.

That like all of those listed above require someone to be using to be of any threat.

Actually, there are several regulations in place that are MORE strict not for car OWNERSHIP, which anyone can OWN a car, but for car OPERATION.

You need a license to drive a car. You don't need a license to operate a firearm.

It's illegal to drive drunk. It's not illegal to drink and shoot.

If you become senile, or otherwise disabled (such as epilepsy), your driver's license can be revoked. A senile old man can still use a gun.

If you don't pay parking tickets, they take away your driver's license. They don't take away your gun.

Perscription drugs can only be issued by a PhD or MD, and can only be sold be a Pharmacist. Anyone with a business license and the proper paperwork can sell a gun, you don't even need a degree.

If you abuse perscription drugs, or sell them to another party, you could go to jail. If you sell your shotgun to your neighbor, you make a neat profit, in fact, there are entire Gun Shows based around selling owned firearms to other people.

Chainsaws are so rarely used in violent crimes that regulating them is stupid.

Baseball bats are glorified sticks. If you regulate baseball bats, you may as well regulate trees.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Why not I've heard people on this site say once you have paid your debt to society then you should be free to go about business as usual.

And when he goes out with his fresh new piece and murderizes the people that put him away, that's fine too? After all, he paid his debt. He can own guns!

If your going to assume that they will commit crimes again then let's just put every guilty person who has committed a felony to death because they MIGHT do it again.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: intrepid

We have certain rights here. My rights are not trampled on because of the actions of others. See, this is the core of personal responsibility.

The person that commits the crime is the issue. The single individual or individuals are the issue. MY firearms are not.

I know this is difficult for some to grasp, but it is the way it is.

Oh I get it.

When the next shooting happens I don't want to hear, "It mental illness, not the guns." It's quite obvious that ship has sailed too. Let's have some reality. When it happens I want to hear, "Small price of them to pay for my rights." Because that's what's being said here. And believe me, THIS thread will be coming up again.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Why not I've heard people on this site say once you have paid your debt to society then you should be free to go about business as usual.

And when he goes out with his fresh new piece and murderizes the people that put him away, that's fine too? After all, he paid his debt. He can own guns!

Do you watch a lot of movies? how often does that happen in the real world? When it does, your "justice" system has failed you - he shouldn't have been let out to roam the streets with the rest of us. It's not the GUN'S fault - it's the criminals, and the "justice" system that set him loose.

Maybe we should think about banning THOSE causes of death.

a reply to: nenothtu

Ah, so mental gymnastics are fine to justify forced prayer in school, but the moment someone suggests that maybe not EVERYONE should own a gun, suddenly it's fire and brimstone and the government wants to erode your rights?

You know what happened when I finally took a stand and actually stood outside during morning prayer? Two people threatened to rape me, I got a death threat in my locker, and I was effectively ostracized through the rest of my high school life. My car (when I finally saved up enough to get one) was keyed, and it's tires got slashed.

Now tell me that prayer wasn't forced.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Actually, there are several regulations in place that are MORE strict not for car OWNERSHIP, which anyone can OWN a car, but for car OPERATION.

IS that so ?

Is there a 200 dollar federal tax stamp on it, and people are made to wait months before they get to pick one up ?

Nope.

Is there a federal back ground check and ATF form if a person committed a crime that was punishable by a year or more( thats jay walking, and speeding tickets etc) be denied their RIGHT to own one?

Nope.

Nice try.

a reply to: intrepid

I am not the one blaming "mental illness".
It is the person. No more, no less.

People die with the use of motor vehicles. People die from the actions of others all the time.

MY rights do not get trampled on because of the tragedies of others.
No amount of snotty responses about people dying is going to change my position...or my Rights. Nor is the opinions of a Canadian going to adjust the laws concerning MY rights.
It is a shame that people die......people die all the time from the actions of others.

IF, and I will state this very much as a rhetorical question because I know the answer, if this was truly all about saving lives, the actions of those wanting to save people would be a lot different.

You and anyone else pushing for greater infringement and restricting of OUR Rights are the problem.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Why not I've heard people on this site say once you have paid your debt to society then you should be free to go about business as usual.

And when he goes out with his fresh new piece and murderizes the people that put him away, that's fine too? After all, he paid his debt. He can own guns!

So how would more laws prevent someone like this getting the guns in some back alley business?

a reply to: macman

IF, and I will state this very much as a rhetorical question because I know the answer, if this was truly all about saving lives, the actions of those wanting to save people would be a lot different.

It's not anyone paying attention knows it's not.

A certain group of people who are anti gun here will support their own government denying it's own citizens weapons.

That same government will then turn around, and give weapons way worse to citizens in another country trying to overthrow their own government.

I think if anyone is mental. A psychopath is the people who support gun regulation, and it's sociopathic government, and it's agencies.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: thesaneone
Some of you people crack me up with your support for more gun laws when in reality all gun laws should be removed completely.


Shall not be infringed!


If your a criminal then you are in jail and if you did your time and repaid your debt to society then you should be allowed to live your life like anyone else with no restrictions on your rights, right?

The whole gun 'debate' is ridiculous when one thinks about it.

Cars,knives,baseball bats,chainsaws. prescription drugs are ALL more wide spread than firearms.

ALL are used to kill people.

And yet we don't hear the word 'car violence','knife violence, 'bat violence', and so on.

They only use that made up term for one thing.

One tool.

The big bad evil gun.

That like all of those listed above require someone to be using to be of any threat.

Actually, there are several regulations in place that are MORE strict not for car OWNERSHIP, which anyone can OWN a car, but for car OPERATION.

You need a license to drive a car. You don't need a license to operate a firearm.

It's illegal to drive drunk. It's not illegal to drink and shoot.

If you become senile, or otherwise disabled (such as epilepsy), your driver's license can be revoked. A senile old man can still use a gun.

If you don't pay parking tickets, they take away your driver's license. They don't take away your gun.

Which Constitutional provision guarantees one a right to drive again? Do you seriously not see the legal difference there?

Perscription drugs can only be issued by a PhD or MD, and can only be sold be a Pharmacist. Anyone with a business license and the proper paperwork can sell a gun, you don't even need a degree.

See the commonality there? Both are required to be licensed.

If you abuse perscription drugs, or sell them to another party, you could go to jail.

And if you misuse a gun, you can ALSO go to jail. How 'bout that?

If you sell your shotgun to your neighbor, you make a neat profit, in fact, there are entire Gun Shows based around selling owned firearms to other people.

And rightfully so. Guns can benefit anyone, unlike prescription drugs.

Chainsaws are so rarely used in violent crimes that regulating them is stupid.

A source of death is a source of death - why let one go, and over-regulate the other? Personally, I think one should be licensed to use a chainsaw at all. Chainsaw accidents can be pretty horrendous, especially when used by the goofy. Ain't you glad I'm not the chainsaw commissioner?

Baseball bats are glorified sticks. If you regulate baseball bats, you may as well regulate trees.

Exactly. maybe you're beginning to understand the irrationality of "gun control"!

a reply to: macman

IDK what my nationality has to do with anything, or cars for that matter. That's why those are called "accidents".

No matter. I have all the reference material I need for the future.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Driving is not a right so please stop using that comparison it's just silly.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Actually, there are several regulations in place that are MORE strict not for car OWNERSHIP, which anyone can OWN a car, but for car OPERATION.

IS that so ?

Is there a 200 dollar federal tax stamp on it, and people are made to wait months before they get to pick one up ?

Nope.

Is there a federal back ground check and ATF form if a person committed a crime that was punishable by a year or more( thats jay walking, and speeding tickets etc) be denied their RIGHT to own one?

Nope.

Nice try.

You don't need a license to operate a gun. That alone makes cars more restrictive. Your mental gymnastics failed, don't try to talk up gun regulations like they're someone MORE strict than car regulations.

Shall I go on, then?

You are legally required to have liability insurance in case you injure someone with your car. You are not required to have gun insurance in case you accidentally shoot someone.

You are legally required to keep your car in good running condition, and many states have emissions standards and annual inspections that if your car doesn't meet, you can't legally operate it. You don't have to get your gun inspected yearly.

You have to renew your license to operate your vehicle every seven years or so. You don't have to renew your nonexistent gun operators license.

Want more?

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Driving is not a right so please stop using that comparison it's just silly.

I'm not the one that brought it up.