It's the Guns, Stupid

Apr 20, 2007 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Truthdig

“And that's the end of the issue”

Why do we have the same futile argument every time there is a mass killing? Advocates of gun control try to open a discussion about whether more reasonable weapons statutes might reduce the number of violent ... via Truthdig

Comments (Page 4,829)

Showing posts 96,561 - 96,580 of103,242
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Spocko

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103151
Mar 26, 2013
 
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee, most of the former military I know support my absurdities including the ones that shoot with me.
Go figure.
Birds of a feather ...
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103152
Mar 26, 2013
 
just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and it was the whole reason for the Amendment because the suppression of some peoples' "inalienable...self evident" right to be treated as all others, given the all-too-obvious fact that "all men are created equal", was being violated by certain narrow-minded, small-brained, hate-mongering racists, though my point was that it is not solely up to the states to decide "social issues" as the Federal government has more than adequately been recognized as the leading authority in such matters.
<quoted text>


The irony here lies in the fact that one of the main purposes of the 14th Amendment was to allow freed slaves to travel from one state to another while armed.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103153
Mar 26, 2013
 
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Birds of a feather ...


stay warm in cold weather.
gubbub

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103154
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Excuses Are Reason for Human,,Guns have no excuses.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103155
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet Heller agrees that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right not dependent on one being a member of a militia. Again the BOR merely secures pre-existing rights which the court in Cruikshank made clear.
As far as common sense goes that is rather subjective, don't you think? The court ruled 5 to 4 in Heller's favor. In your opinion did the majority or the minority use the most common sense?
The example was to show you that in the era that the amendment was written, the citizens often have more sophisticated arms than the military did.
NO ONE IS ARGUING AGAINST AN INDIVIDUALS' RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!! NO ONE!!!

Why do you keep bringing it up?

The ONLY point of contention is whether or not anyone has any right, be it real or imagined, to possess/own ANY type of firearm...that is all.

Perhaps if you were to stop confusing the issue with innuendo, supposition and conjecture, we might actually be able to both realize some sort of progress in this debate...?

I get it that you THINK that you should be able to possess or own any type of firearm you'd like, I even understand that you THINK that the Constitution extends to you this perception of a right to own or possess any type of firearm that you like, but merely THINKING that you should doesn't lend any credence to the actuality/reality of the matter, nor will imposing your existentialistic ideology on the issue.

There are people out there in the World who THINK they should be allowed to rape other people, who THINK that they should be allowed to molest children, who THINK that they should be allowed to rob or murder people even, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, yet merely THINKING that one should be allowed to do or possess or own something does not stand to automatically confer any actual entitlement to the desire/want/possession/ownersh ip of such.

See what you get for thinking?
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103156
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
You brain-dead too? I have guns, I shoot targets every Sunday morning with my marine buddies, none of us supports the absurdities of you freaking gun-a-holics!
YOU are a Lucking Fiar.
YOU have NO guns AT ALL, TUCKFARD!!!

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103157
Mar 26, 2013
 
Someone You Know wrote:
Uh... if you look at world murder statistics (not just gun violence) the US is at about the middle of the spectrum so it's obvious it's not just about the guns, stupid.
I'm not giving mine up.
No one wants you to give up your gun...All that anyone has campaigned for are logical, reasonable, sensible restrictions on the TYPES of firearms the average person can have access to/ownership of, and more stringent background checks to keep ALL firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally impaired.

That's all!
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103158
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
NO ONE IS ARGUING AGAINST AN INDIVIDUALS' RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!! NO ONE!!!
Why do you keep bringing it up?
The ONLY point of contention is whether or not anyone has any right, be it real or imagined, to possess/own ANY type of firearm...that is all.
Yeah? Well, what do YOU not understand about the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL N-O-T BE INFRINGED?
just an allusion wrote:
Perhaps if you were to stop confusing the issue with innuendo, supposition and conjecture, we might actually be able to both realize some sort of progress in this debate...?
TAKE YOUR OWN ADVICE, BITCH!
just an allusion wrote:
I get it that you THINK that you should be able to possess or own any type of firearm you'd like, I even understand that you THINK that the Constitution extends to you this perception of a right to own or possess any type of firearm that you like, but merely THINKING that you should doesn't lend any credence to the actuality/reality of the matter, nor will imposing your existentialistic ideology on the issue.
And YOU engage in nothing other than parsing, i.e., take a little here, take a little there, take some more later on until there is NOT A THING LEFT!

The DEATH of a THOUSAND CUTS!
just an allusion wrote:
There are people out there in the World who THINK they should be allowed to rape other people, who THINK that they should be allowed to molest children, who THINK that they should be allowed to rob or murder people even, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, yet merely THINKING that one should be allowed to do or possess or own something does not stand to automatically confer any actual entitlement to the desire/want/possession/ownersh ip of such.
See what you get for thinking?
But you talk ALL ABOUT YOURSELF with THAT statement!

In other words, you engage in that tactics otherwise known as casuistry, projection, and bloviation, all wrapped into one!
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103159
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
No one wants you to give up your gun...All that anyone has campaigned for are logical, reasonable, sensible restrictions on the TYPES of firearms the average person can have access to/ownership of, and more stringent background checks to keep ALL firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally impaired.
That's all!
BULLSHIT!

That's the fact of the matter, plain and simple.

What YOU are seeking is NOT 'gun-control.' Rather, what YOU are after is PEOPLE control.

You engage in 'GOLDILOCKS GUN-CONTROL':
This gun is too big, that gun is too small, this gun is too powerful, that one is too weak, this one is too black, and ugly, and that one is not pink enough.

Face it, YOU BITCH: YOU HATE GUNS, and THAT is the ONLY THING WHICH MATTERS.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103160
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>I know people who have worked as state and Federal Employees and there is a big difference even in pay scales & benefits and the Federal Employees get a hell of a lot better in benefits that State Employees you should Google it which I don't need to I know.
We were talking about state 'Senators' and state 'Representatives'...Just because their position title is prefaced by the term "state" does not make them 'state-level' employees!

You are displaying your idiocy!
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103161
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
Then explain to me what you perceive to be "unconstitutional" about banning slavery and, following the "principle" of that answer, what you perceive to be "unconstitutional" about banning access by the general public-at-large to certain types of firearms for their own safety, you know, much like the Federal government imposed speed limitations, seat belt laws, and restricted the use of certain chemicals and toxins in our foodstuffs, and any number of other Federally-backed restrictions/limitations oriented towaeds, basically, protecting us from ourselves.
YOU are so CFUKING ignorant of matters that you're a veritable idiot!
The U.S. Government has NO authority to regulate the wearing of seat belts, regulate roadway speeds, or even regulate the uses of whatever chemicals WITHIN STATE BORDERS.

The only reason those laws are enforced is because YOUR elected representatives in the several states AGREED to accept money as a BRIBE.

S HIT, you BITCH, YOU don't even know your own Federal Constitution, yet here YOU are pretentiously proffering up opinions which have ZERO validity!
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103163
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
We were talking about state 'Senators' and state 'Representatives'...Just because their position title is prefaced by the term "state" does not make them 'state-level' employees!
You are displaying your idiocy!
YET MORE IDIOCY from THE IDIOT!

Elected people in state offices are INDEED EMPLOYEES of the state, you DUMB SH IT!

VERY BIG HINT: WHO pays their wages?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103164
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
No one wants you to give up your gun...All that anyone has campaigned for are logical, reasonable, sensible restrictions on the TYPES of firearms the average person can have access to/ownership of, and more stringent background checks to keep ALL firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally impaired.
That's all!
Dianne Feinstein Gun ban in 1995 - She wanted to Ban all guns, Force turn in

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103165
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmm... the 14th Amendment was also called the bayonet amendment. I wonder why, don't you?
Irrelevant to the current topic of discussion...There's been more than enough distractive, diversionary BS in this discussion already, sheesh!

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103166
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
The irony here lies in the fact that one of the main purposes of the 14th Amendment was to allow freed slaves to travel from one state to another while armed.
No one is saying anything about anyone not having a Constitutional right to bear arms....

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103167
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
We were talking about state 'Senators' and state 'Representatives'...Just because their position title is prefaced by the term "state" does not make them 'state-level' employees!
You are displaying your idiocy!
No you were, here is the link to your post of you displaying your Idiocity
just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
You do understand/are aware that state Senators and Representatives are Federal employees...Right?
http://www.topix.com/forum/guns/TIOOJ2V09UCFQ...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103168
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

just an allusion wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is saying anything about anyone not having a Constitutional right to bear arms....
the Modern Liberals use to until 2010.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103169
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Well, I believe that we've touched upon the real issue for all of the confusion and animosity towards the proposed gun legislation and that is that the lot of you simply do not know what-in-the-hell you're futilely attempting to talk about which, conversely, also points out the very real need for further legislation on the matter to protect you idiots from yourselves!

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103170
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

I've wasted enough of my time trying to rationalize and reason with this quorum of idiots...I'm out!

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103171
Mar 26, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Never argue with an idiot as they'll only debate you down to their level and then beat you with experience!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 96,561 - 96,580 of103,242
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••