• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AND YOU WANT MY GUNS???

Enough of your diatribe and Ad-Hom attacks

Your worthless opinion is ignored.
Rich, its obvious to everyone that suicides are a number to you to be used for your agenda.

Its telling you used a gun suicide study instead of a suicide study to prove your point, such fakery.
 
This is an exception to the rule, and you can't tie a single death to these people.
But it does exist, the rest is a strawman. We were talking about gun worship, not gun worshipers killing folks.
The rest of this are just farcical opinions on "gun worship",
So you say. Explain how you think those opinions are farcical, unless you're using that adjective to dismiss their perspective on the reasons why we are debating this issue here.

and they're the kind of opinions that keeps you from being taken seriously.
When talking to a close-minded group I don't expect to be taken seriously, it's not in your nature to let new information.
It certainly doesn't add to a useful debate on gun control.
Neither does your hand-waving away the opinions of, and the research done, by others.
 
But it does exist, the rest is a strawman. We were talking about gun worship, not gun worshipers killing folks.

So you say. Explain how you think those opinions are farcical, unless you're using that adjective to dismiss their perspective on the reasons why we are debating this issue here.


When talking to a close-minded group I don't expect to be taken seriously, it's not in your nature to let new information.

Neither does your hand-waving away the opinions of, and the research done, by others.
the bannerrhoid left wants to pretend that gun advocates -some of whom do not own guns-are gun worshippers when the bannerrhoid movement is a combination of the dishonest (those who claim crime control is their motive) and those who are cultists in the faith based fiction that gun control reduces crime
 
Is it fear that drives gun control advocates to advocate for more gun control?
Can't speak for others but it is the suffering that clinging to our gun culture causes, not the fear, imho.

A marginal understanding of Buddhism would help you understand that. There is too much suffering in this life and a worthy goal would be to do all that we can to express compassion in our behaviors and empathy in our thoughts and speech to help rid ourselves and others of much of it.
 
Can't speak for others but it is the suffering that clinging to our gun culture causes, not the fear, imho.

A marginal understanding of Buddhism would help you understand that. There is too much suffering in this life and a worthy goal would be to do all that we can to express compassion in our behaviors and empathy in our thoughts and speech to help rid ourselves and others of much of it.
so what would you do to alleviate this suffering?
 
the bannerrhoid left wants to pretend that gun advocates -some of whom do not own guns-are gun worshippers when the bannerrhoid movement is a combination of the dishonest (those who claim crime control is their motive) and those who are cultists in the faith based fiction that gun control reduces crime

You can throw all the bannerhoids eggs you want at the rock and they still would have no impact. :LOL:
 
You can throw all the bannerhoids eggs you want at the rock and they still would have no impact. :LOL:
Perhaps not, but the fact remains-I have been dealing with the anti gun movement since the time the Peanut farmer was president, and it is plainly obvious that the entire movement is based on a combination of a big lie and a big myth
 
He didn't kill three people. He killed two mopes-one an ass raping chester, and he disarmed (really) another mope. I am glad there are two less assholes on the street
No he SHOT three people, two he killed and one he wounded. He was lucky that he didn;t wound or kill others with shooting them.
Rittenhouse had no idea who he was shooting.
If he based on his actions he had shot a retired school teacher and former police officer and a honor student... which he could just as easily have shot.. since he had no idea who he was shooting.
Would you be so happy.
I doubt it.

Rittenhouse is the worst example of a gun owner.
 
Perhaps not, but the fact remains-I have been dealing with the anti gun movement since the time the Peanut farmer was president, and it is plainly obvious that the entire movement is based on a combination of a big lie and a big myth
Too bad the GOPukkke insurrectionists didn’t have CC—corrupt carry—a year ago, eh? **** your poor feelings dealing with the ‘anti gun’ movement.

The ‘big lies’ have always started with the nazified gop since the 1920s. Try dealing with the 20 Sandy Hook children with their faces blown apart with your WoWs—Weapons of War.
 
But it does exist, the rest is a strawman. We were talking about gun worship, not gun worshipers killing folks.
Please explain in detail what is "gun worship"... please give concrete examples of such.

So you say. Explain how you think those opinions are farcical, unless you're using that adjective to dismiss their perspective on the reasons why we are debating this issue here.


When talking to a close-minded group I don't expect to be taken seriously, it's not in your nature to let new information.
Well.. you just described anti gunners. Think about it. your kind thinks that a sign saying "gun free zone"... is going to stop a fellow intent on murdering school children. How can you be taken seriously when you think that is a solution.?
When a fellow kills his mother..and steals her weapons to go kill children.. and your first solution to stopping this fellow is "universal background checks"...
How can you be taken seriously.?
When you say that people that own guns are 'gun worshippers"... How can you be taken seriously?
When you ignore the fact that for three decades gun sales increased tremendously and crime went down.. how can you be serious that more guns equals more crime?

Cripes..you anti gunners don;t even know the laws that are on the books currently!!!. Talking about "gun show loopholes".. and such.
Or "getting firearms over the internet".

The truth is..there is no rational debate with you anti gunners because its not about facts or logic for you. Its about your paranoia and fear and feelings.

Neither does your hand-waving away the opinions of, and the research done, by others.
Actually.. its the anti gunners that hand wave away the research done by others. Assault weapons ban for 10 years in the US. Magazine restriction for 10 years. Their effect? No statistically significant effect on crime, mass shootings etc.
But yet..you still call for assault weapons bans.
Oh wait.. and then you say 'but but anti gunners don;t want to take away your guns"..
and in the next breath when confronted with the evidence that the assault weapons ban didn;t work... you say "but but the assault weapons ban didn;t work because it didn;t take away peoples guns!!!"
 
Too bad the GOPukkke insurrectionists didn’t have CC—corrupt carry—a year ago, eh? **** your poor feelings dealing with the ‘anti gun’ movement.

The ‘big lies’ have always started with the nazified gop since the 1920s. Try dealing with the 20 Sandy Hook children with their faces blown apart with your WoWs—Weapons of War.
well most people killed with firearms are felons-and the people killing them are felons-mostly demo scum in cities run by Democrats. And it is the demo scum that created "gun free zones" where assholes like Lanza can shoot a bunch of children after killing the unarmed adults.
 
But it does exist, the rest is a strawman. We were talking about gun worship, not gun worshipers killing folks.
If they aren't killing people or committing crimes, why are you concerned?
So you say. Explain how you think those opinions are farcical, unless you're using that adjective to dismiss their perspective on the reasons why we are debating this issue here.
Because those of us who own guns know that we don't "worship" them. You posted efforts by anti-gunners to try to put gun ownership in a bad light by calling it "gun worship".
When talking to a close-minded group I don't expect to be taken seriously, it's not in your nature to let new information.
Biased opinion pieces aren't information.
Neither does your hand-waving away the opinions of, and the research done, by others.
You really don't want "gun worship" to exist, because then you're fighting against two amendments in the Bill of Rights.
 
again, nobody cares what you think they need. Nor do you have any authority to determine what someone else needs. Why do you think anyone should be listening to you anyway, when you have no idea what an "assault rifle" actually is?

Only if you have no idea who rambo is, or what you are referring to as an "assault rifle".

Guns have thousands of legitimate purposes and reasons for keeping them.

And only 3 of thousands of different reasons to own them.

Nobody is trying to take your opinion away. We are just showing how worthless, and incorrect it is.
Your personal attacks is all you have. Try to defend you childish egotistical reasons for owning guns.
I am right but you don't like it being told. You are just another brain dead redneck gun toting Rambo.
 
Your personal attacks is all you have. Try to defend you childish egotistical reasons for owning guns.
I am right but you don't like it being told. You are just another brain dead redneck gun toting Rambo.
IRONY strikes again
 
I didn't start it dough boy.
If you can't defend your position with logic and reason, say nothing and it covers your stupidity.
Logic and reason

free society. I want to own guns. My federal government was never given the proper power to stop me from owning guns, and our timid supreme court sort of agrees with me. That's all I need
 
Logic and reason

free society. I want to own guns. My federal government was never given the proper power to stop me from owning guns, and our timid supreme court sort of agrees with me. That's all I need
I don't care if you have a thousand guns. Those pathetic justifications don't cut it. The fact youre allowed doesn't cut it either. You have no use for them and you know it. It's pure ego and maintain the tough guy imagine amongst your cowboy mates.
You're like kids showing your toys at Christmas.

I want my guns. That says it all.
Calling someone you've never met a brain dead redneck gun toting Rambo isn't based on logic or reason.

You're a Republican. Do I need other qualifications?
 
Calling someone you've never met a brain dead redneck gun toting Rambo isn't based on logic or reason.
It shows that his position is one of cultural hatred of gun ownership. They are so quick to abandon their facade that it is all about controlling criminals
 
Logic and reason

free society. I want to own guns. My federal government was never given the proper power to stop me from owning guns, and our timid supreme court sort of agrees with me. That's all I need
Seems more like judicial activism.
Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)
 
I don't care if you have a thousand guns. Those pathetic justifications don't cut it. The fact youre allowed doesn't cut it either. You have no use for them and you know it. It's pure ego and maintain the tough guy imagine amongst your cowboy mates.
You're like kids showing your toys at Christmas.

I want my guns. That says it all.


You're a Republican. Do I need other qualifications?
you are lying. And given your attitude, I suspect any reason someone gives will not meet your irrelevant standards. your hatred of gun ownership is pathetic and suggests are rather disturbing image.
 
Seems more like judicial activism.
what part of the constitution gave the federal government the power to restrict the arms of private citizens./ let's see how the logarithm works here. I am betting not well
 
I don't care if you have a thousand guns. Those pathetic justifications don't cut it. The fact youre allowed doesn't cut it either. You have no use for them and you know it.
Funny, I used seven of them for target practice just this last weekend.

It's pure ego and maintain the tough guy imagine amongst your cowboy mates.
My shooting partner is a 60 year old single mom, although she was raised in Wyoming and does know how to ride.

You're like kids showing your toys at Christmas.

I want my guns. That says it all.
You are unstuck in reality.
You're a Republican. Do I need other qualifications?
Well, since I'm not a Republican, and have never voted for a Republican for president in 40 years of voting, you'd first have to not be wrong. Which you are.
 
Back
Top Bottom