Argue the other side.

[vegas giants]

From were I'm sitting both sides have trouble in that area

Perhaps. It is a highly charged topic. Much like abortion is.

 

[TurtleDude]

From were I'm sitting both sides have trouble in that area

you might be right but there is a big difference. I rarely see Pro gun advocates engage in abject dishonesty as to our motivations. We pro gun advocates usually are gun owners who tire of our rights being scapegoated by liberals who pretend harassing gun owners will somehow impact people who already ignore laws against murder and robbery . The anti gun advocates generally pretend that public safety is what motivates them and that -at worst-our rights are collateral damage. Yet the venom directed at lawful gun owners and groups like the NRA prove that its hatred of pro gun voters and pro gun organizations that truly motivate the anti gun leaders. And when one side cannot even be honest about its true motivations, respectful debate is impossible.

 

[OlNate]

Come on dude. If Project exile was a success it would be in every city in America. It was hugely expensive and only worked because the FEDS paid for it.

Why didn't the city of Richmond do it on its own?

lmao...whew! Look at the goal posts move! :lol:

 

[vegas giants]

lmao...whew! Look at the goal posts move! :lol:

More evidence of the impossibility of honest debate by some pro gunners on here

 

[OlNate]

More evidence of the impossibility of honest debate by some pro gunners on here

lol...honest debate? haha...ok.

 

[Chillfolks]

you might be right but there is a big difference. I rarely see Pro gun advocates engage in abject dishonesty as to our motivations. We pro gun advocates usually are gun owners who tire of our rights being scapegoated by liberals who pretend harassing gun owners will somehow impact people who already ignore laws against murder and robbery . The anti gun advocates generally pretend that public safety is what motivates them and that -at worst-our rights are collateral damage. Yet the venom directed at lawful gun owners and groups like the NRA prove that its hatred of pro gun voters and pro gun organizations that truly motivate the anti gun leaders. And when one side cannot even be honest about its true motivations, respectful debate is impossible.

That is an awful broad brush to use. I've meet individuals who advocate for control because of an honest attempts at safety. I've also meet people that see expanding gun rights as a middle finger to the left. And the flip of both. Each side has their false warriors using issue for politics and unfortunately they get most of the attention.

 

[TurtleDude]

That is an awful broad brush to use. I've meet individuals who advocate for control because of an honest attempts at safety. I've also meet people that see expanding gun rights as a middle finger to the left. And the flip of both. Each side has their false warriors using issue for politics and unfortunately they get most of the attention.

I disagree because I didn't refer to the rank and file but the leaders.

 

[vegas giants]

That is an awful broad brush to use. I've meet individuals who advocate for control because of an honest attempts at safety. I've also meet people that see expanding gun rights as a middle finger to the left. And the flip of both. Each side has their false warriors using issue for politics and unfortunately they get most of the attention.

Exactly right....though you probably do not care about my opinion on this subject I think you expressed the greatest truth here

 

[Chillfolks]

I disagree because I didn't refer to the rank and file but the leaders.

Actually you mentioned anti gun advocates pretend to care before you mentioned anything about their leadership. You kind of lumped them both together although that may not have been the way you wanted it to come across. Anyway there is a lot BS being dropped on the issue.

 

[Chillfolks]

Exactly right....though you probably do not care about my opinion on this subject I think you expressed the greatest truth here

I always care what peoples opinions are, when they agree with me lol

 

[TurtleDude]

Actually you mentioned anti gun advocates pretend to care before you mentioned anything about their leadership. You kind of lumped them both together although that may not have been the way you wanted it to come across. Anyway there is a lot BS being dropped on the issue.

so let me ask you one last question on this

do you believe the two sides are equally dishonest as to their motivations and arguments or not?

 

[Maccabee]

Let me make sure I understand your plan. You wan the federal government to fund Project Exile in every city in the country? Is that correct?

I'm not against federal government. They have certain rights granted to them by the constitution. If cities need federal funding to effectively implement Project Exile, I don't see why shouldn't they.

 

[vegas giants]

I'm not against federal government. They have certain rights granted to them by the constitution. If cities need federal funding to effectively implement Project Exile, I don't see why shouldn't they.

At least you have a plan. I am really not against it. I just need to see it done on a much larger scale and in a big city. I am just not sold on it yet but I would love to see the experiment on say Chicago and then see the results

 

[Maccabee]

At least you have a plan. I am really not against it. I just need to see it done on a much larger scale and in a big city. I am just not sold on it yet but I would love to see the experiment on say Chicago and then see the results

Is Richmond not a large city?

 

[vegas giants]

Is Richmond not a large city?

A little over 200,000. That is classified as a small city

 

[Chillfolks]

so let me ask you one last question on this

do you believe the two sides are equally dishonest as to their motivations and arguments or not?

The sides are neither honest or dishonest, it's the people advocating for their sides who have trouble with honesty.

I'm the extremely small sampling of this forum I can agree that there seems more dishonest intentions on the anti gun side. However this is an anonymous forum and someone can argue both sides of an issue with diffrent user names just to be a dick of they choose.

Outside of this forum I really don't know there are far too many people that i don't know there motivation.

 

[Nap]

The sides are neither honest or dishonest, it's the people advocating for their sides who have trouble with honesty.

I'm the extremely small sampling of this forum I can agree that there seems more dishonest intentions on the anti gun side. However this is an anonymous forum and someone can argue both sides of an issue with diffrent user names just to be a dick of they choose.

Outside of this forum I really don't know there are far too many people that i don't know there motivation.

I'm not a fan of trying to discern the motivation as that often times becomes the focus of attention rather than the actual policy or point the person is talking about. When focusing on the actual arguments, the level of dishonesty and ignorance from the gun control advocates side is rather ridiculous. Everything from not being able to distinguish between an automatic and a semi-automatic, calling the AR-15 a "high powered rifle", that the founding fathers wouldn't be able to imagine the idea of an assault rifle and only had muskets, etc.

As a gun owner, taking to a GCA is likely what it must feel like to be a meteorologist trying to discuss climate change and the person you are talking to keeps commenting on how ridiculous the idea of global warming is due to how cold it was the day before.

 

[OlNate]

The sides are neither honest or dishonest, it's the people advocating for their sides who have trouble with honesty.

I'm the extremely small sampling of this forum I can agree that there seems more dishonest intentions on the anti gun side. However this is an anonymous forum and someone can argue both sides of an issue with diffrent user names just to be a dick of they choose.

Outside of this forum I really don't know there are far too many people that i don't know there motivation.

Now hold on there, mutli accounting is against the rules, no one would be doing that...

I think the problem here isn't honesty, as I honestly believe that each side thinks they are truly right - at least, most of us do, some of us are less concerned with honesty than others. Approach can be a problem, in terms of how we talk to one another, but even that is not at the heart of it. The issue is feasibility. Each side wants to promote solutions that the other will never accept. This is a catapult for polarization and division, and, frustratingly, ensures that nothing will ever be done to cut down on gun related deaths in a meaningful way, only that people will get more and more pissed off each other while patting themselves on the back for having "the" solution and "doing the best they can"...and oh the world would be perfect, if not for the other side.

If America had a magic button that could cause all guns to evaporate into thin air, you would still have violent death, you would still have mass murder, the only difference is that those motivated to commit those acts would turn to even more dangerous, less specific implements. The anti gun crowd would suggest it would be knives or bats, but we see the truck killings, we have seen the bombings...hell, the greatest act of terrorism in America's history didn't involve a single bullet fired. Gun control appears to have little to do with the human impulse to do evil. Same goes for suicide, accidental death, and pretty near everything the anti-gun crowd seems to want to pin on gun culture.

If you guys were serious about stemming the issue, you wouldn't be looking at the symptoms, you would be looking at the cause. You would address poverty, mental illness, gaps in education between rich (and safe) and poor (and dangerous) communities. If you look at the majority of people involved in this gun violence, they don't appear to be all that healthy and / or happy. Maybe start there, rather than creating more and more ineffective gun control measures that cause division, and, potentially after a certain threshold has been crossed, retaliation, or, equally ineffective, throwing your hands in the air and saying nothing can be done, my rights, my rights, etc.

Of course, addressing the cause is hard, and expensive, and might reduce the privilege of those who are in a position to drive (and pay for) those changes...so, it's much easier to brawl endlessly and let the statistics pile up, so long as each side has the other to blame. Sometimes I wonder if a solution will ever be arrived at, given the fact that in order to do so, both sides will have to admit that they let this go on far too long, with far too many dead, because BEING right was more important than DOING right.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Why can't it be done in a decent sized city? What good is a plan that does not work where most people live?

People live in small cities and towns too.

 

[dogboy49]

And if anyone from the pro-2nd Amendment side can argue the pro-gun control side.

OK, even though I am not good at this, here are a couple:

Historically, some people always misuse guns. Except for law enforcement, we should restrict or reduce or eliminate guns from society in an attempt to solve the problem that evil people will obtain them, and then hurt others with them.

There are insufficient obstacles in place to prevent law abiding gun owners from becoming killers. When as many people have guns as we do in the US today, I live in constant fear for my life and the lives of others. I should never have to live in fear.

 

[vegas giants]

People live in small cities and towns too.

That's nice

 

[Rucker61]

OK, even though I am not good at this, here are a couple:

Historically, some people always misuse guns. Except for law enforcement, we should restrict or reduce or eliminate guns from society in an attempt to solve the problem that evil people will obtain them, and then hurt others with them.

There are insufficient obstacles in place to prevent law abiding gun owners from becoming killers.

Very good point. I have friends that I've known for over 20 years who would be truly frightened if they knew I was legally carrying concealed around them. They are equally or more afraid of law abiding gun owners than they are of criminals, and this is the mindset that drives their GCA activities. They don't care if new laws only affect lawful gun owners - to them, that's a feature, not a bug.

When as many people have guns as we do in the US today, I live in constant fear for my life and the lives of others. I should never have to live in fear.

Another very good point. GCAs tend to invent rights that don't exist.

 

[vegas giants]

OK, even though I am not good at this, here are a couple:

Historically, some people always misuse guns. Except for law enforcement, we should restrict or reduce or eliminate guns from society in an attempt to solve the problem that evil people will obtain them, and then hurt others with them.

There are insufficient obstacles in place to prevent law abiding gun owners from becoming killers. When as many people have guns as we do in the US today, I live in constant fear for my life and the lives of others. I should never have to live in fear.

Many veterans who have served in combat also promote reasonable gun control. They do not live in fear. People who think muslims in this country are all out to kill them live in fear.

 

[TurtleDude]

I'm not against federal government. They have certain rights granted to them by the constitution. If cities need federal funding to effectively implement Project Exile, I don't see why shouldn't they.

Government has powers granted to it by the constitution, not rights. I realize to many its a hyper technical argument but its important because in our system, rights are the default position, governmental power is not

 

[TurtleDude]

The sides are neither honest or dishonest, it's the people advocating for their sides who have trouble with honesty.

I'm the extremely small sampling of this forum I can agree that there seems more dishonest intentions on the anti gun side. However this is an anonymous forum and someone can argue both sides of an issue with diffrent user names just to be a dick of they choose.

Outside of this forum I really don't know there are far too many people that i don't know there motivation.

OK non answer-ducked making a call.