I think he might hold the gun on the husband until he had him tied up..AND THEN RAPE THE WIFE..that's how they do it in the movies..
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
The gun lobby is deranged
- Thread starter Dawkinsrocks
- Start date
Werbung:
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
What a question. I was referring to slippery slope theories in general, especially when the NRA adheres to it so strongly. They are afraid to give an inch, because Dems will take a mile . They think first Dems will take away assault rifles, then everything else from our cold dead hands.
I am referring to the AK-47 et. al. These weapons are designed to efficiently kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. They have little use for anything else.
i dont want meighbors with loud motorcycles but if they want them they well within their rights to buy them.
the point was to illustrate that individual rights are just that, individual.
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
There is quite a difference between a machine that kills efficiently and a machine with a loud noise.
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
Do individuals have a right to defend themselves?
Rafael Norma
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,201
The funnel law, for the citizens (Hay excepciones a la regla)
motorcycles do kill effienciently but thats not the point. the point is rights.
your wish does not trump my rights any more than mine do to yours.
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's a shame you chose not to answer it. If you're going to further erode my rights because of the actions of some criminal, I think it's fair to ask at what point my freedom and liberty will no longer be subject to infringement for crimes I have not committed.
If you believe the argument you're making to ban "assault" rifles is valid, why is the same argument no longer valid when a "lesser" firearm is used? There must be some number of dead innocent children you believe to be acceptable enough that you would no longer consider the same argument valid for also banning those "lesser" firearms.
That argument was already used to ban the full auto versions of those weapons and now you want to ban the semi-auto versions as well... Seems pretty slippery to me. More importantly, that argument does not explain why you believe that I, or any other law abiding gun owner, should be punished for the actions of criminals who ignored the law.
A ban would only ensure that you keep such weapons out of the hands of lawful citizens, like myself, while criminals could still obtain them on the black market. Since criminals are perfectly capable of illegally importing cocaine and heroin despite their bans and an expensive "war" on drugs, what makes you think the bans you propose will do anything to keep such weapons out of the hands of people who would use them "to efficiently kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible"?
Let's say you do succeed in banning "assault" rifles but some criminal does acquire one on the black market to perpetrate a mass shooting, which of our remaining liberties will you then demand be sacrificed to the "greater good" of society for the acts of that criminal? Is there some other measure you would suggest to keep such weapons out of the hands of criminals? If there is some way you can think of to keep guns out of the hands of actual criminals, why is it not possible to do that while allowing lawful gun owners the freedom to keep and bear "assault" rifles?
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
You seem to forget, this is now a "Democracy!".... If his gang is bigger than yours, there's nothing to stop him from legally imposing his will on you by force.
TheJPRD
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 417
Democrats infringing upon the 2nd Amendment, and using as their justification that it will save childrens' lives disgusts me! What a bunch of hypocritical demogogues! Obozo's going to stand in front of cameras tommorrow with a crowd of children behind him. He's going to tell us that he is protecting children by destroying the 2nd Amendment. His implication is that we supporters of the 2nd Amendment are enablers of child killers. What a despicable demogogue this President is.
The right Conservative would hold a competitive news event, with children and mothers whose lives have been saved by being or having a law-abiding and skilled gun owner nearby when their lives were threatened. In destroying the 2nd Amendment, Democrats are enabling those criminals who are bigger and stronger to take the lives and property of those incapable of defending themselves against the physical threat.
In the 1800's, the revolver was called "The Great Equalizer". It was called that because it allowed women, the elderly, children, the average "Joe" on the street, and even the infirm and crippled to protect themselves against those more powerful who'd do them harm. Democrats are now intending to take our nation back to a time when Might makes Right! Millions of people will be left defenseless against anyone who'd harm them in any manner. How many people will DIE or be crippled because of this Democrat insanity? These leftists are beneath contempt!
The right Conservative would hold a competitive news event, with children and mothers whose lives have been saved by being or having a law-abiding and skilled gun owner nearby when their lives were threatened. In destroying the 2nd Amendment, Democrats are enabling those criminals who are bigger and stronger to take the lives and property of those incapable of defending themselves against the physical threat.
In the 1800's, the revolver was called "The Great Equalizer". It was called that because it allowed women, the elderly, children, the average "Joe" on the street, and even the infirm and crippled to protect themselves against those more powerful who'd do them harm. Democrats are now intending to take our nation back to a time when Might makes Right! Millions of people will be left defenseless against anyone who'd harm them in any manner. How many people will DIE or be crippled because of this Democrat insanity? These leftists are beneath contempt!
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
Sorry. Laws have to apply to the virtuous as well as everyone else. Hard to tell when somebody's brain will flip out.
We already ban grenade launchers, antiaircraft missiles, etc. I think the bar is too low. Need to raise it to include assault rifles. As far as a dead child body count, I haven't thought about it.
We never know who is going to be "law abiding" do we.
If you dearly want an assault rifle, I don't trust you.
Gipper
Well-Known Member
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
^^^^ I guess I don't understand conservative humor. Is this supposed to show irony? sarcasm? hypocrisy? I know it spoils a joke if you have to explain it. But could you explain it anyway. What is so funny? But if it is not a joke, could you explain the message?
Gipper
Well-Known Member
Liberals and Ds screamed when Bush pushed through the Patriot Act, rightfully so, yet they say nothing about BO's extension and expansion of that same Act. Why?
Liberals and Ds are fearful of government when it is run by an R. When it is run by a D, their fears disappear. Why?
Libs and Ds regularly condemn America for it's past crimes. Such things as it's treatment of Native Americans and African Americans. Yet it was the state which was responsible for the murderous and heinous treatment these groups suffered in our history. The very same state libs and ds love today. For example, at Wounded Knee American government troops attacked a group of Native Americans who had previously been FORCED to relinquish their firearms. They were defenseless and the state murdered them mercilessly, even awarding Medals of Honor to many of the mass murderers. Are not the events of Waco, just a few short years ago, very similar? Do you not think the state capable of committing atrocities again?
One would think libs and Ds would learn the Second Amendment is for defense against a tyrannical government or invading enemy. It has nothing to do with hunting or self defense. When a lib says, "you don't need that kind of gun to go hunting," you know you are dealing with a dunce.
Liberals and Ds are fearful of government when it is run by an R. When it is run by a D, their fears disappear. Why?
Libs and Ds regularly condemn America for it's past crimes. Such things as it's treatment of Native Americans and African Americans. Yet it was the state which was responsible for the murderous and heinous treatment these groups suffered in our history. The very same state libs and ds love today. For example, at Wounded Knee American government troops attacked a group of Native Americans who had previously been FORCED to relinquish their firearms. They were defenseless and the state murdered them mercilessly, even awarding Medals of Honor to many of the mass murderers. Are not the events of Waco, just a few short years ago, very similar? Do you not think the state capable of committing atrocities again?
One would think libs and Ds would learn the Second Amendment is for defense against a tyrannical government or invading enemy. It has nothing to do with hunting or self defense. When a lib says, "you don't need that kind of gun to go hunting," you know you are dealing with a dunce.
Werbung:
Gipper
Well-Known Member
If you can't figure it out on your own, there is nothing I can say will help you. Sorry. You are too far gone.
Similar threads
