Biden rails against access to assault weapons after recent spate of shootings

[Anthony60]

Wow! Wow! Wow! That is all I can say! Wow! If there ever was a post to prove my thesis that the New Left Wing World Order has become like Christian apologists with convoluted explanations of scripture that read like gobblygook but are presented as rational explanations of the bible, yours tops the list. It is nice to see a poster do this and show in brilliant just how desperate the left is to use Orwellian speak of ridiculous phrasing and illogic to persuade the masses that

"Yes, folks, 2 plus 2 really does equal 5"

The left can get themselves to believe anything, absolutely anything. That they can just change the wording of the 2A and interpret it to mean the exact opposite of what it means, even though. They could easily explain that 2+2=5, as long as there was some political gain for them.

 

[Noodlegawd]

What would a "good reason" be?

Saving lives would be a good reason, although not necessarily a sufficient one. Banning rifles because they have pistol grips will not save any lives.

 

[poppopfox]

Nope, but if you still think so then cite the post # in which I did so, otherwise I will accept your inaction as being your apology.

Crickets…

Sincerest apologies my friend. I thought I was replying to Tirmin, who made the claim.

 

[poppopfox]

Saving lives would be a good reason, although not necessarily a sufficient one.

How many need to lose their lives and be deprived of their rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness before that reason becomes sufficient? See graphic below for up to date stats for this year.

Banning rifles because they have pistol grips will not save any lives.

You know this how?

 

[Paradoxical]

The left can get themselves to believe anything, absolutely anything. That they can just change the wording of the 2A and interpret it to mean the exact opposite of what it means, even though. They could easily explain that 2+2=5, as long as there was some political gain for them.

I never cease to be amazed that this new left makes George Orwell into a prophet far more correct than any bible prophecy ever claimed. The biblical prophecies are always very vague and almost any event can be shoehorned to fit but George Orwell hit the nail squarely on the head with this New World Order left using doublespeak to convince others that 2 + 2 equals 5 by repeating lies through the media so often that the unsuspecting general public that doesn't keep up on things believes it for no reason other than they are told it is true by the believers. This pertains to everything today. Whether it be the lie that mass shootings are by MAGA conservatives or that CRT is not being taught in schools (Because they now call it by another name) or that videos of teens on bikes putting ballots in mailboxes and taking pictures to prove it don't really mean anything at all.

"We are not to believe our own eyes and we are to just shuffle along. The government has spoken and they relied on those "in authority". You are nothing. You are to just believe".

This is identical to how religions operate through group mind control and elders and experts in whatever religion it is telling people what to believe because it is written by a scientist or doctor and we MUST trust authority and if are told there are entities like Thetans, or there is a real hell, or Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged creature, we are not to doubt it. The leaders have spoken. ANY thing can be twisted using apologetics to make it mean whatever those in authority want the public to believe.

 

[braindrain]

Gives you a clear understanding maybe. There are SC justices who have given dissenting opinions on every pro gun ruling you've quoted in the past. If the understanding was "clear" the votes would have been 9 - 0.

No that just proves that some judges but pushing their political views ahead of doing their actual job.

 

[RF667799]

How many need to lose their lives and be deprived of their rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness before that reason becomes sufficient? See graphic below for up to date stats for this year.

You know this how?

View attachment 67424951

Unsourced again.

 

[Noodlegawd]

How many need to lose their lives and be deprived of their rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness before that reason becomes sufficient? See graphic below for up to date stats for this year.

How many have to lose their lives before we make drunk driving a felony? Restore the 55 mph speed limit and make SPEEDING a felony. Ban cars capable of going faster than that? Ban vodka?

See, we balance risk and freedom all the time. People only seem to care about saving lives if they don't personally have to give anything up for it. Guns with pistol grips are an easy (if silly) target.

You know this how?

1. Because it makes no sense that it would save lives.
2. Because I've seen no evidence that it would save lives.
3. Because there's evidence that it wouldn't save lives.

It's a bit like banning red cars that look sporty, because people who own them tend to drive faster.

 

[ttwtt78640]

How many need to lose their lives and be deprived of their rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness before that reason becomes sufficient? See graphic below for up to date stats for this year.

OK, but more homicide victims are killed annually with knives than with rifles of any kind. Is that a “good reason” to ban or heavily regulate knives?

You know this how?

View attachment 67424951

Because alternative weapons can and will be employed by homicidal and/or suicidal people. The idea that “access to X” (alone or even primarily) causes “X crime” is absolutely ridiculous. As proof one only need observe the (very small) percentage of those with “access to X” who commit “X crime”.

 

[poppopfox]

No that just proves that some judges but pushing their political views ahead of doing their actual job.

And the majority on the court did the same.

 

[poppopfox]

Unsourced again.

The source was boldly evident.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Gives you a clear understanding maybe. There are SC justices who have given dissenting opinions on every pro gun ruling you've quoted in the past. If the understanding was "clear" the votes would have been 9 - 0.

Exactly, so it has never been “clear” that the 2A rights were intended to be based on the (past, current or future) militia service status of a given person.

 

[RF667799]

The source was boldly evident.

View attachment 67424954

It's customary to link to the source, so that posters can see the entire context.

It's also a site rule.

 

[poppopfox]

How many have to lose their lives before we make drunk driving a felony?

It is a felony if someone is injured or killed.

Restore the 55 mph speed limit and make SPEEDING a felony. Ban cars capable of going faster than that? Ban vodka?

I'd agree with those, would probably save many lives.

See, we balance risk and freedom all the time. People only seem to care about saving lives if they don't personally have to give anything up for it. Guns with pistol grips are an easy (if silly) target.

The bolded is a careless and pessimistic remark, you should have prefaced it with imo (in my opinion).

1. Because it makes no sense that it would save lives.

To you.

2. Because I've seen no evidence that it would save lives.

Did you look deep enough?

3. Because there's evidence that it wouldn't save lives.

Show me.

It's a bit like banning red cars that look sporty, because people who own them tend to drive faster.

Another divergent car analogy. How about we compare a hand held pistol grip weapon to a vehicle that is also designed as a weapon, like an M1 Abrams or an APC? Are those banned for civilian use?

 

[Rucker61]

Another divergent car analogy. How about we compare a hand held pistol grip weapon to a vehicle that is also designed as a weapon, like an M1 Abrams or an APC? Are those banned for civilian use?

Are you comparing an Abrams to this?

first pistol grip on a rifle

Does anybody know who first came up with the idea and on which rifle?

www.ncgunowners.com

 

[RF667799]

It is a felony if someone is injured or killed.

I'd agree with those, would probably save many lives.

The bolded is a careless and pessimistic remark, you should have prefaced it with imo (in my opinion).

To you.

Did you look deep enough?

Show me.

Another divergent car analogy. How about we compare a hand held pistol grip weapon to a vehicle that is also designed as a weapon, like an M1 Abrams or an APC? Are those banned for civilian use?

You could just explain what makes a gun with a pistol grip more suitable for murder than guns without. Or are you referring to actual pistols, which are most often used for murder and do indeed have pistol grips.

I find it interesting you would agree with the 55 mph speed limit and making speeding a felony. Would you also agree with criminal background checks as a requirement to possess a motor vehicle? And if 55 mph doesn't reduce the death toll, surely you agree we should then mechanically limit motor vehicles to a speed of 30, and require NASCAR style safety harness, roll cage, and crash helmets?

 

[poppopfox]

It's customary to link to the source, so that posters can see the entire context.

Pardon me, I thought it wouldn't be much of a chore to type in the name of the site instead of just clicking on a link. Regardless, the source was identified.

It's also a site rule.

So is DBAJ.

 

[Rucker61]

You could just explain what makes a gun with a pistol grip more suitable for murder than guns without. Or are you referring to actual pistols, which are most often used for murder and do indeed have pistol grips.

Obviously in the case of the Delvigne Patent Carbine it was to enable spray fire.

 

[RF667799]

Pardon me, I thought it wouldn't be much of a chore to type in the name of the site instead of just clicking on a link. Regardless, the source was identified.

So is DBAJ.

Then you should do your best to abide by that one as well.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It is a felony if someone is injured or killed.

I'd agree with those, would probably save many lives.

The bolded is a careless and pessimistic remark, you should have prefaced it with imo (in my opinion).

To you.

Did you look deep enough?

Show me.

Another divergent car analogy. How about we compare a hand held pistol grip weapon to a vehicle that is also designed as a weapon, like an M1 Abrams or an APC? Are those banned for civilian use?

Actually, the car analogy is valid in this case. If mere state issued privileges (definitely) contributing to many injuries and deaths are allowed to remain intact then why not allow rights which do so to remain intact as well?

There are two legitimate ways to remove a right of the people: by Constitutional amendment or by due process of law.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You could just explain what makes a gun with a pistol grip more suitable for murder than guns without. Or are you referring to actual pistols, which are most often used for murder and do indeed have pistol grips.

I find it interesting you would agree with the 55 mph speed limit and making speeding a felony. Would you also agree with criminal background checks as a requirement to possess a motor vehicle? And if 55 mph doesn't reduce the death toll, surely you agree we should then mechanically limit motor vehicles to a speed of 30, and require NASCAR style safety harness, roll cage, and crash helmets?

His arguments boil down to we need a sufficiently powerful ‘nanny state’ to reduce all manner of risks to someone’s health and life, but especially those resulting from criminal acts. In other words, folks having “too much” freedom is the ‘root cause’ of crime.

 

[poppopfox]

Then you should do your best to abide by that one as well.

An empty statement with nothing behind it.

You could just explain what makes a gun with a pistol grip more suitable for murder than guns without. Or are you referring to actual pistols, which are most often used for murder and do indeed have pistol grips.

I find it interesting you would agree with the 55 mph speed limit and making speeding a felony. Would you also agree with criminal background checks as a requirement to possess a motor vehicle? And if 55 mph doesn't reduce the death toll, surely you agree we should then mechanically limit motor vehicles to a speed of 30, and require NASCAR style safety harness, roll cage, and crash helmets?

Would you like a link to that source?

 

[Paradoxical]

No that just proves that some judges but pushing their political views ahead of doing their actual job.

This is why Democrats want judges on their side of the political spectrum and why conservatives do. Everyones opinion is colored by their world view.

 

[poppopfox]

Actually, the car analogy is valid in this case. If mere state issued privileges (definitely) contributing to many injuries and deaths are allowed to remain intact then why not allow rights which do so to remain intact as well?

If privileges and rights were considered synonymous you might have a point.

There are two legitimate ways to remove a right of the people: by Constitutional amendment or by due process of law.

 

[TomFitz]

I never cease to be amazed that this new left makes George Orwell into a prophet far more correct than any bible prophecy ever claimed. The biblical prophecies are always very vague and almost any event can be shoehorned to fit but George Orwell hit the nail squarely on the head with this New World Order left using doublespeak to convince others that 2 + 2 equals 5 by repeating lies through the media so often that the unsuspecting general public that doesn't keep up on things believes it for no reason other than they are told it is true by the believers. This pertains to everything today. Whether it be the lie that mass shootings are by MAGA conservatives or that CRT is not being taught in schools (Because they now call it by another name) or that videos of teens on bikes putting ballots in mailboxes and taking pictures to prove it don't really mean anything at all.

"We are not to believe our own eyes and we are to just shuffle along. The government has spoken and they relied on those "in authority". You are nothing. You are to just believe".

This is identical to how religions operate through group mind control and elders and experts in whatever religion it is telling people what to believe because it is written by a scientist or doctor and we MUST trust authority and if are told there are entities like Thetans, or there is a real hell, or Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged creature, we are not to doubt it. The leaders have spoken. ANY thing can be twisted using apologetics to make it mean whatever those in authority want the public to believe.

What was that about convoluted explanations that look and sound like gobbledygook?