- Joined
- Jun 11, 2011
- Messages
- 31,089
- Reaction score
- 4,384
- Location
- The greatest city on Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I see you did a pretty good job of staying silent when I provided legitimate sources instead of an open source and VERY flawed Wikipedia article. You have been owned on these arguments continuously, just admit it already.
prosecute them under the law when they are convicted
we have to catch em' first.
Too bad you presented a wikipedia article, oh BTW, the UN doesn't use uniform crime reporting and neither does Geneva. Of course if you weren't out of your league you would know that. Seriously you are getting smoked like a ham in these arguments, but if you want to keep losing ground be my guest, it's not my funeral.The United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime, and the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development, are not legitimate sources?
who is for you? Fox News?
:lamo
same with any other law
so why should I have to wait a month
Too bad you presented a wikipedia article....
because such a law would make it harder for criminals to get guns.
Don't have to, it's not a credible source and I've already seen the proper international data that proves you are wrong. Care to keep losing?oh, so you didn't even look at the article?
that's intelligent.
you again engage in dishonesty. You are confusing a right with an object.
USE Of an OBJECT can be for good or evil. You appear to confuse rights with objects
what is idiotic is your pretense of being pro second amendment. No one believes that on this thread.
and your idiotic "Heroes of the second amendment" was a new low of dishonesty
No. The dishonesty is YOU attempting to falsely disconnect the use of the right with the effects of the right and the firearms protected in the use of that right. The right deals with the ability to keep and bear those objects which you say has nothing to do with the right.
I have stated that I believe the Second Amendment is - on balance - something which is more positive than it is negative. It does more good than it does harm. But only a ideological zealot blinded against reality would think that there is no negatives that come from it. And that is your position.
so what you are telling us is this bit of idiocy-that no second amendment means NO GUNS and no gun crime
is that what you are saying?
so you ARE blaming our right with some criminal misuse
so much for the facade of being pro gun
Only idiots claim that guns illegally owned or possessed or used are PROTECTED BY THE RIGHT recognized in the second amendment
even more idiotic is the insinuation that if there was no second amendment criminals would have NO GUNs
I never said that. Again, when you state what my views are, please have the decency to quote me instead of lying and making it up.
I am not BLAMING anything. I simply accept the reality that there is both good and bad that comes from our rights. Others can see this. Why cannot you see this? Provide an honest answer to that question and this discussion need not go any further.
So tell us how are children killed by someone illegally possessing a weapon and illegally using it heroes of an amendment that does not protect illegal use or possession
Don't have to, it's not a credible source and I've already seen the proper international data that proves you are wrong. Care to keep losing?
nope but it hassles people like me
my freedom is more important than some idiotic law that may or may not do any good
I can prove it hassles me, you cannot prove that law helps anything
requiring an ID to vote, also hassles folks. yet many 2nd Amendment absolutists want to require the display of an ID to vote.
When it comes to the issue of your claim that the Second Amendment is a PURE GOOD with no bad evolving from it, it matters not what is a crime and what is not a crime. It matters not what is done legally and what is done illegally. It is not the labeling of an act with the word CRIME that makes it a negative, it is the act itself that is negative. Surely you know the difference from law school training. The evil in the action does not come because we put the label of crime upon it. The evil in the action is inherent in the action itself. And it is for that reason that the peoples government applies the label of CRIME or ILLEGAL.
Not relevant
requiring an ID to vote, also hassles folks. yet many 2nd Amendment absolutists want to require the display of an ID to vote.
kinda puts things into perspective though, don't it?
we can hassle honest citizens who just want to vote, but we can't hassle honest citizens who want to buy 30 guns a month?
If you don't have an ID then you also do not have a job nor drive.
kinda puts things into perspective though, don't it?
we can hassle honest citizens who just want to vote, but we can't hassle honest citizens who want to buy 30 guns a month?
so we shouldn't pass any laws since criminals ain't gonna follow them?
:lamo
"alright guys, its now legal to commit murder, since the criminals don't seem to read the state penal code".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?