Gun Control, but not Abortion Control?

[SgtSpiderMan]

Liberals can always rationalize a government interest in diminishing the prerogatives of the civil society with never ending interventions that devour our freedom.

What freedom is being infringed on?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

No personal attack, you know you are stupid, so does everyone on Lit. What you want is already in place.

You said that 30 minutes ago and have yet to back it up. I'm still waiting.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Government should have nothing to do with how I dispose of my private property, only in it's mis-use. Who's property is it, mine or theirs?

I can safely assume that you don't bother with pink slips when buying and selling used cars then?

Liberals can always rationalize a government interest in diminishing the prerogatives of the civil society with never ending interventions that devour our freedom.

Yep. If that's the term you wanna use, yes we're great at it. And you're pretty bad at preventing it.

 

[koalabear]

You said that 30 minutes ago and have yet to back it up. I'm still waiting.

THAT.

 

[RobDownSouth]

....so happy that you have no clue about my life...or me! THAT makes me very very happy!!!!

I hope you have a truly wonderful day!

I hope you have a wonderful one as well.

I trust that you manage your children's government largesse wisely, even as you demonize others for accepting the same filthy lucre that your family enjoys.

 

[unregistered]

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Why bother explaining it to you? Like your nuts, your brain is numb.

I'm flattered that you're interested in my scrotum, but not interested.

I am interested in finding out what freedoms would be infringed on. I would suggest that if you can't name them, they don't exist.

 

[Bad_Doggie]

This is a starting point.

Huh?

I dunno who wrote all that or if you wrote it in reply to someone else, but, it clearly doesn’t address me and neither does 90% of what you wrote address the point I made.

Why you babble on about things such as; “Are you so fearful,” and “surrender your liberty” when you know full well I’m a British citizen living in Germany; both counties of which have heavy gun regulation is anybody’s guess.

Anyway, the only relevant point you made was………

The duty of the state is to safe guard the state, not the individual. There is no obligation on the part of the state to safeguard the individual at any level. The courts have ruled time and time again on this subject. Bottom line is that the individual, and the individual alone, is responsible for their own well being.

Oh really? What is the fundemental duty of a state if it isn’t to protect citizens of that state then?

And what is the state, in your mind, if it isn’t the people in your country? How’s that quote go; of the people, by the people etc?

I dunno, but, I think if you asked most police officers they would tell you that the majority of their time was spent doing just that, protecting the individual.

But, we needn’t stop there let’s look at what the father of both the French and America constitution thought on the matter…

Formal government makes but a small part of civilised life; and when even the best that human wisdom can devise is established, it is a thing more in name and idea than in fact. It is to the great and fundamental principles of society and civilisation- to the common usage universally consented to, and mutually and reciprocally maintained- to the unceasing circulation of interest, which, passing through its million channels, invigorates the whole mass of civilised man- it is to these things, infinitely more than to anything which even the best instituted government can perform, that the safety and prosperity of the individual and of the whole depends.

There is a myth cleaved to by those on the left that once we are disarmed that somehow, miraculously, we'll become a polite society. There is no evidence to support that notion. It you want a polite society, bring back dueling. I assure you that society will become more polite within a generation.

Nice bit of scary misrepresentation you slipped in there dude. Or should I say bro?

The left is leveraging off the deaths of the innocents in CT as a rallying point in the debate. That somehow that horrific episode was a signal moment. It wasn't. The deaths of those children, as monstrous as it seems is as nothing if the trade off is essential liberty. To surrender those liberties now, over an event perpetrated by a madman, is to make worthless all of the lives spent to secure those freedoms to begin with, up to and including the abolition of slavery.

You don’t think that those 20 children’s and their family’s rights/liberties were infringed at all, to say nothing of all other children and families in your country?

Sure the atrocity was carried out by a madman; enabled by that kind of mind set which is an abdication of the principle responsibility of your society, to ensure the safety of individuals in it. You want rights without responsibility and accountability; it’s as simple as that. Until this mind set changes this kinda thing will happen again and again.

In Germany, the UK and the rest of the western world not so much, you ever wonder why?

Woof

 

[Bad_Doggie]

The problem, as I see it, is a lack of responsibility among firearms fetishists.

What we need is a Firearms Responsibility Act.

Simply put, elevate any crime involving a firearm to a Federal Capital Offense, with a mandatory death sentence. No exceptions.

• Crook robs a store with a gun? Death sentence.
• Accidently shoot someone? Death sentence.
• Get caught by TSA agents attempting to take a gun through a metal detector? Death sentence.
• Your kid takes a gun to school to show off? Death sentence.
• Carry a concealed weapon without a permit? Death sentence.

I can't see how any NRA member would be opposed to this, as they've yammered about responsible gun ownership for years. This legislation would take away a hallowed talking point of the NRA and their overcompensating followers "Criminals will always be able to get guns!"...this will still be true, but they won't use them more than once!

Obviously, this won't affect NRA members since they are all law abiding white males. This will, however, quickly and ruthlessly "thin the herd" of irresponsible gun scofflaws....Not to mention make people think twice before deciding to own a gun.

Slightly radical but it would certainly have a positive effect.

Woof!

 

[Bad_Doggie]

To see if you paid your tax and if the car belongs to you...it's the only thing he can use it for.

DaDaa!

I knew you’d get there in the end; even if it was long torturous winding path. It’s fucking excruciating talking to you.

Of course, he can also use it to: see if the car in your possession has been imported to the US legally, who sold it to you, if you sell it who you sell it to and from that can see if the new owner has a licence, he can see if the car has been used criminal offense or been involved in an accident, if that car conforms to road worthiness checks etc.

All useful information, some of it applicable to gun ownership wouldn’t you say?

Woof!

 

[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?

Linky

If she did not have a gun, he probably would have been raped... and maybe killed if she saw their faces.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Linky

If she did not have a gun, he probably would have been raped... and maybe killed if she saw their faces.

Highly unlikely. I'd say bordering the impossible.

 

[julybaby04]

I hope you have a wonderful one as well.


Thanks for the well wishes! Falcons won! Good day!!!!!

 

[pornstarwannabe]

Highly unlikely. I'd say bordering the impossible.

Highly unlikely that she would have been be raped?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Highly unlikely that she would have been be raped?

She might have been.

 

[BotanyBoy]

DaDaa!

I knew you’d get there in the end; even if it was long torturous winding path. It’s fucking excruciating talking to you.

Of course, he can also use it to: see if the car in your possession has been imported to the US legally, who sold it to you, if you sell it who you sell it to and from that can see if the new owner has a licence, he can see if the car has been used criminal offense or been involved in an accident, if that car conforms to road worthiness checks etc.

All useful information, some of it applicable to gun ownership wouldn’t you say?

Woof!

So like I said, make all gun transfers FFL only if you want them to be legal, no more "gun show loop hole" and the gov knows who that number was last sold to, done and done. There is no need for a registration process, it would be a high dollar worthless pile of redundant shit just like the Canadian one...licence the people and things get even simpler.

Unless you just like overly complicated worthless as all redundant fuck government programs that do nothing but soak up resources and money.

Now about your statement earlier..

You, as ever, miss the point. (but like last time I'm sure you will continue arguing the point you don't get and avoid the point being made like the plague) However.......

The point isn’t to use it in the prosecution of a crime it is to know where the guns are, who has them an if they are being used/kept in a responsible way and to prevent them falling into the hands of criminals and the insane.

You have car registration in the US don’t you?

Woof!

I want to know how registration will prevent guns from falling into the hands of criminals/nutters.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

So like I said, make all gun transfers FFL only if you want them to be legal, no more "gun show loop hole" and the gov knows who that number was last sold to, done and done. There is no need for a registration process, it would be a high dollar worthless pile of redundant shit just like the Canadian one...licence the people and things get even simpler.

Unless you just like overly complicated worthless as all redundant fuck government programs that do nothing but soak up resources and money.

Now about your statement earlier..


I want to know how registration will prevent guns from falling into the hands of criminals/nutters.

It would stop some people from selling to criminals.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It would stop some people from selling to criminals.

Just short of a inch by inch search and seizure of every dangerous item in the nation followed by a nightmarish police state there will be always be criminals doing criminal shit, guns, drugs, poison, sharp shit, books... whatever....

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Just short of a inch by inch search and seizure of every dangerous item in the nation followed by a nightmarish police state there will be always be criminals doing criminal shit, guns, drugs, poison, sharp shit, books... whatever....

I'm not debating that.

My point is that right now it is perfectly legal for a private person to sell a convicted or even wanted felon a gun. There is also no legal consequence for a legal gun holder not reporting a stolen gun. These two things need to change.

 

[koalabear]

I'm not debating that.

My point is that right now it is perfectly legal for a private person to sell a convicted or even wanted felon a gun. There is also no legal consequence for a legal gun holder not reporting a stolen gun. These two things need to change.

That's because you are stupid. You already stated you did not know all the State Handgun Laws, yet you continue to spout your stupidity.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

That's because you are stupid. You already stated you did not know all the State Handgun Laws, yet you continue to spout your stupidity.

Which state makes it illegal for private citizens to sell guns to other private citizens?

 

[koalabear]

I'm not debating that.

My point is that right now it is perfectly legal for a private person to sell a convicted or even wanted felon a gun. There is also no legal consequence for a legal gun holder not reporting a stolen gun. These two things need to change.

Which state makes it illegal for private citizens to sell guns to other private citizens?

You should have stuck with that one, now you just look even more idiotic.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You should have stuck with that one, now you just look even more idiotic.

More personal attacks and nothing to do with the message. You calling me names because I'm right doesn't make me less right. It just shows you have nothing to add to the discussion.

 

[koalabear]

More personal attacks and nothing to do with the message. You calling me names because I'm right doesn't make me less right. It just shows you have nothing to add to the discussion.

^^More stupidity, nothing to say but http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gifhttp://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gifhttp://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gifhttp://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gif

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

^^More stupidity, nothing to say but http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gifhttp://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gifhttp://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gifhttp://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/blahblah_zpsc16ca5bc.gif

I've been waiting on you to provide anything to the discussion since this afternoon. You haven't & you won't.