• 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!

Fear and gun ownership.

His problem is that he lacks the ability to lose an argument on his own points gracefully. It's obvious that he does not understand the US Constitution or it's amendment system, hates the second amendment and does not want to be taught, therefore he lashes out and projects. I became bored with talking to a brick wall.
Again I would ask you to point to the specific that I do not understand. But of course you will not because this is nothing more than an excuse to pretend I do not understand the constitution.
 
The states have representative government, just like the federal government. That means their own governors and legislators, state Senators etc. You are asking for a pure democracy. It does not work that way. We are not ancient Greece.

"Pure Democracy" already exists in the USA - especially in the state of California
But even here in Georgia it exists - a few years ago, there was a plebiscite to decide if sales of alcoholic drinks should be allowed on a Sunday. The people of Georgia voted that it should be allowed.



Did you hear of the recent "Brexit" vote in the UK ?

Some issues are too important for representatives to decide, and must be decided directly by the people in a Yes / No ballot.
 
"Pure Democracy" already exists in the USA - especially in the state of California
But even here in Georgia it exists - a few years ago, there was a plebiscite to decide if sales of alcoholic drinks should be allowed on a Sunday. The people of Georgia voted that it should be allowed.



Did you hear of the recent "Brexit" vote in the UK ?

Some issues are too important for representatives to decide, and must be decided directly by the people in a Yes / No ballot.
I hate to burst your bubble, however the federal government and the states to not amend the constitution by plebiscite. And California is not a pure democracy. Neither is Georgia. Pure democracy means everything is voted on by everyone. There would be little need for legislatures.
 
I hate to burst your bubble, however the federal government and the states to not amend the constitution by plebiscite. And California is not a pure democracy. Neither is Georgia. Pure democracy means everything is voted on by everyone. There would be little need for legislatures.

I didn't say they did, I was saying they should

Post#533:
"IMO, once Congress has passed a motion to repeal an amendment (with an proposed amendment of their own", it should be ratified (or not) by a plebiscite in each state.'

Please learn to READ.
 
I didn't say they did, I was saying they should

Post#533:
"IMO, once Congress has passed a motion to repeal an amendment (with an proposed amendment of their own", it should be ratified (or not) by a plebiscite in each state.'

Please learn to READ.

If these deplorables were secure in their manhood they would not demand guns.
 
I didn't say they did, I was saying they should

Post#533:
"IMO, once Congress has passed a motion to repeal an amendment (with an proposed amendment of their own", it should be ratified (or not) by a plebiscite in each state.'

Please learn to READ.

Fortunately for the survival and success of this nation, they don't.
 
I think you've accidentally slipped in an unwanted negative there.

maybe a government program to pay for penis implants would stop the proliferation of gun ownership?

thinking out of the box here, i think this needs some serious consideration.

yeah, i know most will think i am kidding. i am not. look into the psychology of gun ownership.
 
Fortunately for the survival and success of this nation, they don't.

So you've been able to read correctly now ?

And why would it risk the "survival and success of the nation" ?
Have I not just demonstrated to you that such examples of direct democracy, ALREADY exist in the USA ?


Please explain, in detail, why the merits a constitutional amendment is best decided by representatives of the people, and not the people who elected them, themselves.
 
maybe a government program to pay for penis implants would stop the proliferation of gun ownership?

thinking out of the box here, i think this needs some serious consideration.

yeah, i know most will think i am kidding. i am not. look into the psychology of gun ownership.

You might be on to something, a buy back program with a difference...
 
You do not care because that really is the only response you can give. Were you to engage in a debate you would just look silly because you especially have nothing to argue. All you can do is create the fear of your guns will be taken away. All you ever do is create fear.
no I reject your specious claims that our arguments don't meet your irrelevant bullshit standards. You are the one in fear
 
maybe a government program to pay for penis implants would stop the proliferation of gun ownership?

thinking out of the box here, i think this needs some serious consideration.

yeah, i know most will think i am kidding. i am not. look into the psychology of gun ownership.
yet another moronic trolling post. I wonder why so many leftwing men who hate guns are fixated on penises?
 
So such a buy back offer is not going to work with you...
why would I sell something I wanted to own unless the money would allow me to buy a better gun and make a profit? Do anti gun men have some issue with penises that us normal men don't have?
 
why would I sell something I wanted to own unless the money would allow me to buy a better gun and make a profit? Do anti gun men have some issue with penises that us normal men don't have?

So there is no price you're willing to accept to go without guns. They really do mean that much to you.
 
So there is no price you're willing to accept to go without guns. They really do mean that much to you.
Oh I'd happily sell lots of the guns I don't use much any more if I got a good price for them. But I won't give up my liberty and rights to own guns/
 
No, you'd rather see the world burn.
I'd rather see all the gun hating loons continue to wet themselves over honest citizens owning guns but your moronic dichotomy is moronic. You'd rather have criminals run free and murder thousands than have honest people able to defend themselves. and that is what your goals would accomplish
 
...your moronic dichotomy is moronic.

You have such a way with words.

You'd rather have criminals run free and murder thousands than have honest people able to defend themselves. and that is what your goals would accomplish

No, what evidence have I ever given you to suggest that ?

Just another one of your pathetic, and dare I say "moronic" straw-man lies.
 
You have such a way with words.



No, what evidence have I ever given you to suggest that ?

Just another one of your pathetic, and dare I say "moronic" straw-man lies.
it is to be expected,, you admitted that if guns were banned, the law abiding would be disarmed long before the criminals
 
it is to be expected,, you admitted that if guns were banned, the law abiding would be disarmed long before the criminals

Disarmed but not of all guns.

But what possible evidence do you have of making your shameful accusation that "You'd rather have criminals run free and murder thousands than have honest people able to defend themselves" ?
When have I ever said I condone murder ?

That's akin to me accusing you of you condone mass shootings, by your insistence that "honest citizens" retain the ability to become a mass shooter at any time.
 
Disarmed but not of all guns.

But what possible evidence do you have of making your shameful accusation that "You'd rather have criminals run free and murder thousands than have honest people able to defend themselves" ?
When have I ever said I condone murder ?

That's akin to me accusing you of you'd rather have honest citizens to retain the ability to become a mass shooter at any time.
oh are you back to the idiocy that after all guns are banned, the president who signed the ban into law might decide-with his like minded toadies, to unban some?
 
oh are you back to the idiocy that after all guns are banned, the president who signed the ban into law might decide-with his like minded toadies, to unban some?

And you're back to the mental block that the president = the National executive


And what if it was a heavily Democrat heavy Congress passing a veto-proof bill for a Republican president to sign into law ?
 
Back
Top Bottom