Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

retrofade

The People vs. the NRA

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, DestinFlPackfan said:

Relax Sean, I own guns and I'm a responsible gun owner. I expect nothing less from the rest of gun owners. Keep your shit locked and away from anyone but yourself.  You take it on vacation and leave it behind...In my book you don't deserve to own, shows how +++++ing irresponsible you are. 

Own guns be ultimately responsible for there use...plain and simple. To argue otherwise is as you put it ' dipshit'. Leave your guns where kids can get it..,not me..but I guess its cool with you.

I really don't think it's cool with you but your statement? ???? 

C'Mon man, it's about responsibility. 

You and the other clown are advocating for people who’s weapons are stolen and then used in a crime to be charged with that crime as well. To me that is straight up dipshitery. I keep my weapons locked up, but that may not keep a determined thief from stealing them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

Apples and oranges. Driving, as I’m reminded all the time, is a privilege, not a right. That’s why we can set speed limits, require seatbelts, and everything else we do to make driving as safe as possible. We can’t infringe on inalienable rights like that. 

If your rights come with too much responsibility for you, you are in no way required to exercise them. That’s why I choose not to own a gun. There’s no shame in it. Some people can’t exercise free speech without spewing vitriol that gets them fired from their jobs. They are allowed to keep their mouths shut if that’s too big a risk for them.

What about a knife?  Just a regular kitchen knife?  What if my son broke into my office, stole my NCO sword, and stabbed someone with it?  Still a charge for me?  You see the difference between a privilige and a right, but don't acknowledge the similarities, such as you can lose your right, there are requirements with the right (no tanks, no full-auto, state-specific regs) just like with a privilege.  Also, I see two problems with the responsibility assertion.  One, you are advocating this in a perfect world, absolute and without room for variance.  Two, you are allowing for the problem to be sloughed off, even just a bit, of the kid who stole.  Now Destin's hotel scenario, for sure that person's ability to possess weapons should be questioned, but by whom?  How comfortable are we with having a constitutional right be stripped over a single incident of negligence, and is this supposed to be a forever thing?  Are we allowing no wiggle room, where perhaps the blame on the owner is unjust?  Just the one gun or is government going to try and take all of his guns?  Is that the best thing to do?  I completely agree with responsibility, but I pose the question, because I think folks will have answers that are absolute, and many others will have qualifiers..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

What about a knife?  Just a regular kitchen knife?  What if my son broke into my office, stole my NCO sword, and stabbed someone with it?  Still a charge for me?  You see the difference between a privilige and a right, but don't acknowledge the similarities, such as you can lose your right, there are requirements with the right (no tanks, no full-auto, state-specific regs) just like with a privilege.  Also, I see two problems with the responsibility assertion.  One, you are advocating this in a perfect world, absolute and without room for variance.  Two, you are allowing for the problem to be sloughed off, even just a bit, of the kid who stole.  Now Destin's hotel scenario, for sure that person's ability to possess weapons should be questioned, but by whom?  How comfortable are we with having a constitutional right be stripped over a single incident of negligence, and is this supposed to be a forever thing?  Are we allowing no wiggle room, where perhaps the blame on the owner is unjust?  Just the one gun or is government going to try and take all of his guns?  Is that the best thing to do?  I completely agree with responsibility, but I pose the question, because I think folks will have answers that are absolute, and many others will have qualifiers..

Knives aren’t an American birthright enshrined by the constitution. Owning kitchen knives doesn’t come with the same level of responsibility. You are under no obligation to protect freedom - your own and that of others - when you purchase a block of steak knives. 

Im for removing all regs. If you can afford and want a tank, I think you should get one. You have the right. If someone dies or gets hurt because you have a tank, you’re on the hook, even if you were as careful as one could be with a tank. 

I’m eliminating variance by using the law. If criminal behavior results from you exercising your right, then I think it’s your fault whether you pulled the trigger or not. That doesn’t absolve the perpetrator of responsibility, it just ensures that all guilty parties are held responsible. You took on the awesome responsibility of owning deadly weapon, so you have to ensure that no one gets hurt as a result of your decision. I don’t think that’s a lot to ask in return. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2020 at 2:52 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

So a person needs to be able to afford a safe large enough to lock up a riffle or shot gun in order to own one?  Ridiculous and comes off classist, although I am sure not intentionally.

When somebody says stuff like "I am pro 2A or pro gun but..."  It is usually followed up with nonsense.  If you can afford to also buy a safe.  This means the single mom who wants to buy a $200 shotgun at a pawn shop because she has a creepy neighbor, now must also scramble to find another $200 for the cheapest possible gun safe.  And how do you enforce it?  A gun safe is only viable as a protection if people use it.  Requiring they own a safe, does not mean they will not keep the pistol under the pillow.  Just a law that does no good.  A free gun safety course every 8 years would cover your concern here and be far more effective, without making it harder for the marginalized to have their right to self defense.

What, a single mom need to get to her job and she buys a $700 beater car to get to work and now we make her pay for insurance so that if she hits or injures someone there's resources to fix the situation? Classist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, sean327 said:

You and the other clown are advocating for people who’s weapons are stolen and then used in a crime to be charged with that crime as well. To me that is straight up dipshitery. I keep my weapons locked up, but that may not keep a determined thief from stealing them. 

Upon reflection,  I do see I agreed  with that part. Not my intention. I dont agree, if my arms are kept under lock and key, and they get stolen . I report immediately with serial numbers. I agree with you on this point. 

But, I haven't seen you agree on personal responsibility when children get hold of our guns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

What about a knife?  Just a regular kitchen knife?  What if my son broke into my office, stole my NCO sword, and stabbed someone with it?  Still a charge for me?  You see the difference between a privilige and a right, but don't acknowledge the similarities, such as you can lose your right, there are requirements with the right (no tanks, no full-auto, state-specific regs) just like with a privilege.  Also, I see two problems with the responsibility assertion.  One, you are advocating this in a perfect world, absolute and without room for variance.  Two, you are allowing for the problem to be sloughed off, even just a bit, of the kid who stole.  Now Destin's hotel scenario, for sure that person's ability to possess weapons should be questioned, but by whom?  How comfortable are we with having a constitutional right be stripped over a single incident of negligence, and is this supposed to be a forever thing?  Are we allowing no wiggle room, where perhaps the blame on the owner is unjust?  Just the one gun or is government going to try and take all of his guns?  Is that the best thing to do?  I completely agree with responsibility, but I pose the question, because I think folks will have answers that are absolute, and many others will have qualifiers..

Off topic but can we see the sword? Do you get new swords the higher in rank you go?

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DestinFlPackfan said:

Upon reflection,  I do see I agreed  with that part. Not my intention. I dont agree, if my arms are kept under lock and key, and they get stolen . I report immediately with serial numbers. I agree with you on this point. 

But, I haven't seen you agree on personal responsibility when children get hold of our guns. 

Children won’t get hold of my weapons. They are locked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2020 at 11:21 PM, toonkee said:

What, a single mom need to get to her job and she buys a $700 beater car to get to work and now we make her pay for insurance so that if she hits or injures someone there's resources to fix the situation? Classist!

We get it, you think the under privileged should not be able to defend themselves.  MOARD MURDER AND RAPE!

Driving is not a right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

We get it, you think the under privileged should not be able to defend themselves.  MOARD MURDER AND RAPE!

Driving is not a right.

I see you are a rights without responsibility kind of guy. That mindset doesn't seem to be working out so well these days. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, toonkee said:

I see you are a rights without responsibility kind of guy. That mindset doesn't seem to be working out so well these days. 

 

Making it a law to own a gun safe punishes poor communities.  Are you for or against Voter ID laws?  Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Making it a law to own a gun safe punishes poor communities.  Are you for or against Voter ID laws?  Why?

Just like laws that banned so called Saturday Night Specials back in the 70’s. The only reason cities passed those laws was to keep firearms out of the hands of minorities. Proposals to raise sales taxes on firearms and ammunition are intended to do the same thing. Gun Control laws are intentionally racist as phuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sean327 said:

Just like laws that banned so called Saturday Night Specials back in the 70’s. The only reason cities passed those laws was to keep firearms out of the hands of minorities. Proposals to raise sales taxes on firearms and ammunition are intended to do the same thing. Gun Control laws are intentionally racist as phuck.

Hey if they want their constitutional rights maybe they should have thought twice about being poor and black!  Bootstraps baby!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Making it a law to own a gun safe punishes poor communities.  Are you for or against Voter ID laws?  Why?

Making it a law to require insurance punishes poor communities. Are you against having a functional society and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, toonkee said:

Making it a law to require insurance punishes poor communities. Are you against having a functional society and why?

You did not answer my question.  

Voter ID laws.  

Driving is not a right.  Why do you hate black people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, halfmanhalfbronco said:

You did not answer my question.  

Voter ID laws.  

Driving is not a right.  Why do you hate black people?

Logic is my god, I can see that a piece of paper that said women can't vote and blacks were 3/5 of a person is yours.

Why do you hate women and black people? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Voter ID laws.  Are you in favor, if not why?

Not in favor at this time. It appears to be a solution for a non-existent problem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...