Gun Control, but not Abortion Control?

[MichaelinChina]

As Kingsley Amis said "If you can't piss someone off with your words, there's no point in writing anything"..or words to that effect.

 

[UrsulaX]

Silliness

If a woman has the right to an abortion (especially when the abortion will save her life), why doesn't a woman have the right to own a gun of her choosing that may save her life?

Talk in Congress of limiting rounds to 10 in handguns... the BG (bad guy) won't follow that rule if it becomes law. A woman may need a 17-round magazine to fend off multiple intruders.

Except for LEO (Law Enforcement Officers), gun owners may panic somewhat since they won't have the intense training taken by LEOs. Some fired shots will miss. Gun owners may not have time to change magazines in a panic situation.

Not advocating abortion control in this thread. But if a woman has the right to protect her body (and she does have that right), then she has a right to own a gun to protect that same body.

Maybe that gun is an AR-15, or a .380 AUTO. Her body, her choice.

I think you’re shooting yourself in the foot here. The push for greater gun control reflects the growing number of conspicuous gun-related deaths in this country (a public health issue). Abortion is arguably a public health issue, as well, but its legalization is often misconstrued as promotion. On the contrary, one can support legalized abortion while promoting contraceptives, birth control, morning-after pills, and sex education, all of which could ultimately reduce the need for invasive abortion and the development of the fetuses aborted. The irony of the pro-lifer’s argument is that many of the atrocities he rallies against, such as late-term abortions and poorly regulated abortion clinics, could be combatted with better technology and government investment in clinics via legalized abortion. Similarly, gun control opponents suggest gun owners need guns to defend themselves against a problem they created. Gun owners are adding to the number of guns in circulation and the weapons they would need to defend themselves against. If no guns are around, why do you need to carry a gun in the first place?

Mine is a facile argument, to be sure, but so is yours. The average woman who carries a gun or has an abortion is potentially endangering her life as much as she is defending it. An abortion is the worst way to combat unwanted pregnancy. Women should be familiar with the ramifications of intimacy and have myriad forms of contraception, birth control, and non-invasive measures at their disposal. Similarly, no woman should have to use a gun to protect herself. As a society, we should be able to regulate the number of lethal weapons that fall into civilian hands and ensure the health and well-being of our citizens. Assuming other developed countries can successfully regulate their guns while the U.S. cannot is acknowledging a fundamental flaw in our constitution, and lauding the second amendment for shaping a government that lacks the legitimacy to manage its own weapons is unjustified.

 

[Bad_Doggie]

I think you’re shooting yourself in the foot here. The push for greater gun control reflects the growing number of conspicuous gun-related deaths in this country (a public health issue). Abortion is arguably a public health issue, as well, but its legalization is often misconstrued as promotion. On the contrary, one can support legalized abortion while promoting contraceptives, birth control, morning-after pills, and sex education, all of which could ultimately reduce the need for invasive abortion and the development of the fetuses aborted. The irony of the pro-lifer’s argument is that many of the atrocities he rallies against, such as late-term abortions and poorly regulated abortion clinics, could be combatted with better technology and government investment in clinics via legalized abortion. Similarly, gun control opponents suggest gun owners need guns to defend themselves against a problem they created. Gun owners are adding to the number of guns in circulation and the weapons they would need to defend themselves against. If no guns are around, why do you need to carry a gun in the first place?

Mine is a facile argument, to be sure, but so is yours. The average woman who carries a gun or has an abortion is potentially endangering her life as much as she is defending it. An abortion is the worst way to combat unwanted pregnancy. Women should be familiar with the ramifications of intimacy and have myriad forms of contraception, birth control, and non-invasive measures at their disposal. Similarly, no woman should have to use a gun to protect herself. As a society, we should be able to regulate the number of lethal weapons that fall into civilian hands and ensure the health and well-being of our citizens. Assuming other developed countries can successfully regulate their guns while the U.S. cannot is acknowledging a fundamental flaw in our constitution, and lauding the second amendment for shaping a government that lacks the legitimacy to manage its own weapons is unjustified.

Damn, I wish you would post more often.

You know he won't have a clue what you’re talking about, though, don’t you.

Woof!

 

[about_average]

Right, and didn't that woman have a Bushmaster AR-15 with a 100-clip magazine?

What's a "100-clip magazine"?

 

[about_average]

Similarly, gun control opponents suggest gun owners need guns to defend themselves against a problem they created.

The average woman who carries a gun or has an abortion is potentially endangering her life as much as she is defending it.

As a society, we should be able to regulate the number of lethal weapons that fall into civilian hands and ensure the health and well-being of our citizens

You suggest that the best way to reduce the number of abortions is better sex education and access to clinics. The same argument could be used to reduce gun deaths, better education and access to training.

You're implying that if suddenly every gun in the US fell in to a black hole tomorrow, no person would ever again suffer a violent death at the hands of another. Sure, it would be great if that were the case, but plenty of people are killed by others who aren't wielding guns. Do you tell the woman who is gang raped while walking to her car, "Well, at least you didn't have a gun because you might have someday shot yourself"?
Are you willing to sacrifice the life of the woman in Loganville, GA and her children (and others like them) on the alter of a gun free society? Is that really better than making every effort (which doesn't happen now) to make sure that people who are very unstable aren't able to get the devices to kill others? Be they guns, homemade bombs or destructive things?

I have no idea what your real position is, but there are many who would be happy to have taken away that woman's ability to defend herself and her children from someone who wasn't armed with a gun, but who was intent on doing evil. And she is by no means an isolated case. Just the recently most newsworthy.

 

[pornstarwannabe]

I think you’re shooting yourself in the foot here. The push for greater gun control reflects the growing number of conspicuous gun-related deaths in this country (a public health issue). Abortion is arguably a public health issue, as well, but its legalization is often misconstrued as promotion. On the contrary, one can support legalized abortion while promoting contraceptives, birth control, morning-after pills, and sex education, all of which could ultimately reduce the need for invasive abortion and the development of the fetuses aborted. The irony of the pro-lifer’s argument is that many of the atrocities he rallies against, such as late-term abortions and poorly regulated abortion clinics, could be combatted with better technology and government investment in clinics via legalized abortion. Similarly, gun control opponents suggest gun owners need guns to defend themselves against a problem they created. Gun owners are adding to the number of guns in circulation and the weapons they would need to defend themselves against. If no guns are around, why do you need to carry a gun in the first place?

Mine is a facile argument, to be sure, but so is yours. The average woman who carries a gun or has an abortion is potentially endangering her life as much as she is defending it. An abortion is the worst way to combat unwanted pregnancy. Women should be familiar with the ramifications of intimacy and have myriad forms of contraception, birth control, and non-invasive measures at their disposal. Similarly, no woman should have to use a gun to protect herself. As a society, we should be able to regulate the number of lethal weapons that fall into civilian hands and ensure the health and well-being of our citizens. Assuming other developed countries can successfully regulate their guns while the U.S. cannot is acknowledging a fundamental flaw in our constitution, and lauding the second amendment for shaping a government that lacks the legitimacy to manage its own weapons is unjustified.

You should be a politician. A whole bunch of words that missed my point. Nice try though. Go read an NRA magazine and read the personal stories of women that prevented their own rape/death by using their guns to kill the BG.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You should be a politician. A whole bunch of words that missed my point. Nice try though. Go read an NRA magazine and read the personal stories of women that prevented their own rape/death by using their guns to kill the BG.

You conceded your point hours ago.

Please cite the data you're referring to and include what kind of gun they used. When a girl is raped why shouldn't she have access to an abortion?

 

[coastal-boy]

Note to the right wing:
I'll tell you what...I will give on abortion control IF you give on gun control. You support no guns allowed what so ever. I will support no abortions allowed what so ever. Deal?

 

[pornstarwannabe]

Note to the right wing:
I'll tell you what...I will give on abortion control IF you give on gun control. You support no guns allowed what so ever. I will support no abortions allowed what so ever. Deal?

Since the SCOTUS ruled abortion is a "right" and the Constitution explicitly states (and the SCOTUS affirmed) the right to arms is a 'right," then why would anyone willing negotiate to give up their rights?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Except for LEO (Law Enforcement Officers), gun owners may panic somewhat since they won't have the intense training taken by LEOs. Some fired shots will miss. Gun owners may not have time to change magazines in a panic situation.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Intense training taken by LEO's HAHAHAHAHAHA omg youz so funny.

 

[pornstarwannabe]

You conceded your point hours ago.

Please cite the data you're referring to and include what kind of gun they used. When a girl is raped why shouldn't she have access to an abortion?

We are in agreement. If a woman has the right to save her own life by having an abortion, then she has the right to save her own life by having a firearm.

 

[coastal-boy]

Since the SCOTUS ruled abortion is a "right" and the Constitution explicitly states (and the SCOTUS affirmed) the right to arms is a 'right," then why would anyone willing negotiate to give up their rights?

Amazing thing about our founding fathers...they realized that things change (unlike present-day Republicans). Did you know they even designed the Constitution with a way to change it? Amazing huh?

Why would they do that? Because they realized even then, that Constitutional rights are arbitrary. They can come...they can go.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

Who have you spoken with or heard that wants to take away anyone's right to a gun?

And this is the very root of it all. Anti-gun nuts want to abolish every law abiding citizen's right to own a gun. They're so naive they don't get it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

And this is the very root of it all. Anti-gun nuts want to abolish every law abiding citizen's right to own a gun. They're so naive they don't get it.

Next up...archery, bow and arrow were designed to kill....no one NEEDS that.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You think you know much more than you actually do.....at least having to do with my personal life.

Perhaps you might be better served by staying with things you know are true (or at least things you can prove...)

You've already told us your husband died, leaving you destitute. Assuming he had a job, your four children qualify (or at one time qualified) for social security survivor benefits, aka "government handouts".

While I can see you readily and happily denying other people's children government succor, in all truthfulness I can see you applying a different standard to your own kids. Sure, it's a double standard, but hey you're all about double standards (and the attendant hypocrisy that goes with it).

The alternative, of course, is allowing your children to suffer/go hungry in order to prove a political point, in which case you're an unfit mother.

Sooo....hypocrite or unfit mother?

I'd put money on "hypocrite".

 

[coastal-boy]

And this is the very root of it all. Anti-gun nuts want to abolish every law abiding citizen's right to own a gun. They're so naive they don't get it.

I just want the stupid people not have them.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

I just want the stupid people not have them.

I totally agree. I wish it were that simple.

 

[Liar]

Since the SCOTUS ruled abortion is a "right" and the Constitution explicitly states (and the SCOTUS affirmed) the right to arms is a 'right," then why would anyone willing negotiate to give up their rights?

Would you say that it's as legal and as easy to get any type of abortion as it is to get any type of gun?

 

[BotanyBoy]

I just want the stupid people not have them.

There is the question.....how do you keep the stupid people from having them, I advocated strict training regulations in order to simply buy one under a shall issue system.

Shrink sayz you are ok? Completed training verifying you know wtf you are doing? You get to have a gun....

No licence saying shrink/competency approved....you go to prison and the guns are taken from you.

But noooooooooooooooOOOOoooo left wing changed their feathers on this subject.....this is the one subject where prohibition works!! ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN!!! WEEEEW!!! IT WILL WORK THIS TIME!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA fucking idiots, what's next expand the gun free zone act? THAT worked wonders....

 

[pornstarwannabe]

Amazing thing about our founding fathers...they realized that things change (unlike present-day Republicans). Did you know they even designed the Constitution with a way to change it? Amazing huh?

Why would they do that? Because they realized even then, that Constitutional rights are arbitrary. They can come...they can go.

And we have the mechanism to change the Constitution. Good luck trying to get the states to ratify a change to the right to arms.

 

[BotanyBoy]

And we have the mechanism to change the Constitution. Good luck trying to get the states to ratify a change to the right to arms.

If it were 100% legally repealed.....2A gone as a mother fucker....would you abide?

 

[Liar]

We are in agreement. If a woman has the right to save her own life by having an abortion, then she has the right to save her own life by having a firearm.

Should she in your opinion have the right to have a firearm for any other reason than to save her life?

Let's say for hunting ducks or protecting her property?

 

[coastal-boy]

And we have the mechanism to change the Constitution. Good luck trying to get the states to ratify a change to the right to arms.

Amazing thing...there are 2 ways to change it.

But that isn't the point is it? The point is that the right wing are hypocritical. They are willing to violate one "right" but not another.

 

[Bad_Doggie]

You're implying that if suddenly every gun in the US fell in to a black hole tomorrow, no person would ever again suffer a violent death at the hands of another.

Oh no she didn’t…….and nor has anyone else done so; except you and your kind in order to discredit a perfectly reasonable position.

In fact you whole argument is fallacious.

Woof!

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

We are in agreement. If a woman has the right to save her own life by having an abortion, then she has the right to save her own life by having a firearm.

I've never said otherwise.

I'm still trying to figure out why you want controls on some things but no controls on guns.