"Owning Guns is Bad" VS "De-fund the Police"

[sanman]

On the one hand, Lefties say "You shouldn't be allowed to own guns! If you feel threatened, have the cops come to save you!"

Now, from the other side of their mouths, the Lefties are saying "Cops? To hell with cops! There shouldn't be any cops! De-fund the police!"


So if you're not allowed to own guns to save yourself from harm, and if there can't be any cops to save you from harm -- then is the inevitable outcome that you shouldn't be safe from harm?


Or are Lefties just retarded and totally lacking in any basic logic skills or credibility?

 

[Michael Cole]

On the one hand, Lefties say "You shouldn't be allowed to own guns! If you feel threatened, have the cops come to save you!"

Now, from the other side of their mouths, the Lefties are saying "Cops? To hell with cops! There shouldn't be any cops! De-fund the police!"


So if you're not allowed to own guns to save yourself from harm, and if there can't be any cops to save you from harm -- then is the inevitable outcome that you shouldn't be safe from harm?


Or are Lefties just retarded and totally lacking in any basic logic skills or credibility?

Your man of straw is IQ challenged

 

[Artymoon]

Your man of straw is IQ challenged

Well, it is an interesting premise. Defunding departments while also pushing gun bans. What would be the goal of doing those things?

 

[Michael Cole]

Well, it is an interesting premise. Defunding departments while also pushing gun bans. What would be the goal of doing those things?

Since this is a figment of your imagination, you're going to have to tell me.

 

[TobyOne]

Nailed it.

On the one hand, Lefties say "You shouldn't be allowed to own guns! If you feel threatened, have the cops come to save you!"

Now, from the other side of their mouths, the Lefties are saying "Cops? To hell with cops! There shouldn't be any cops! De-fund the police!"


So if you're not allowed to own guns to save yourself from harm, and if there can't be any cops to save you from harm -- then is the inevitable outcome that you shouldn't be safe from harm?


Or are Lefties just retarded and totally lacking in any basic logic skills or credibility?[/QUOTE]

 

[Artymoon]

Since this is a figment of your imagination, you're going to have to tell me.

My mistake, you seemed like the smartest guy in the room by immediately dismissing his post. Figured you knew something I didn't.

 

[Michael Cole]

My mistake, you seemed like the smartest guy in the room by immediately dismissing his post. Figured you knew something I didn't.

What I know is that police haven't been defunded and only extremists want to ban guns. That's why it's a strawman.

 

[Izzy]

On the one hand, Lefties say "You shouldn't be allowed to own guns! If you feel threatened, have the cops come to save you!"

Now, from the other side of their mouths, the Lefties are saying "Cops? To hell with cops! There shouldn't be any cops! De-fund the police!"


So if you're not allowed to own guns to save yourself from harm, and if there can't be any cops to save you from harm -- then is the inevitable outcome that you shouldn't be safe from harm?


Or are Lefties just retarded and totally lacking in any basic logic skills or credibility?

Which outlier asked to defund all police? I've seen people arguing that every small town doesn't need a military grade vehicle and a swat team with a stockpile of flash bangs, but nobody wanting to rid the world of cops. Remember when a cop threw a flash grenade through a window and it landed in a baby's crib? Cops don't need a flash bang for every petty criminal.

I'm not advocating that we take cops' guns away, but police have been militarized, and that means we spend money on military grade weapons and equipment for every department. We don't need every cop to be as armed as the punisher.

This pretend argument costs brain cells to respond to, so I'll just asked again, who besides 1/4 of MSM wants to take your guns? What actual people have you spoken to who think this way?

 

[Artymoon]

What I know is that police haven't been defunded and only extremists want to ban guns. That's why it's a strawman.

Neither has been done yet and I respectfully disagree that it's just extremists who want to ban guns. But the push is being made to make those very things happen. In my mind, it's either about power/control or these proponents are running on pure emotion and haven't thought that far ahead. If both were to come to pass - however unlikely - it would make for interesting times indeed.

 

[Michael Cole]

Neither has been done yet and I respectfully disagree that it's just extremists who want to ban guns. But the push is being made to make those very things happen. In my mind, it's either about power/control or these proponents are running on pure emotion and haven't thought that far ahead. If both were to come to pass - however unlikely - it would make for interesting times indeed.

No one has ever proposed a ban on guns. No police have been defunded. I prefer to see the reality of events. Hypotheticals can be interesting, but the OP isn't presented as a hypothetical.

 

[sanman]

What I know is that police haven't been defunded and only extremists want to ban guns. That's why it's a strawman.

 

[Michael Cole]

Who cares what these people say? Others are saying shoot the protesters. None of this has any semblance to reality.

 

[jotathought]

No one has ever proposed a ban on guns. No police have been defunded. I prefer to see the reality of events. Hypotheticals can be interesting, but the OP isn't presented as a hypothetical.

Diane Feinstein would disagree with you.

 

[Condor060]

Which outlier asked to defund all police? I've seen people arguing that every small town doesn't need a military grade vehicle and a swat team with a stockpile of flash bangs, but nobody wanting to rid the world of cops. Remember when a cop threw a flash grenade through a window and it landed in a baby's crib? Cops don't need a flash bang for every petty criminal.

I'm not advocating that we take cops' guns away, but police have been militarized, and that means we spend money on military grade weapons and equipment for every department. We don't need every cop to be as armed as the punisher.

This pretend argument costs brain cells to respond to, so I'll just asked again, who besides 1/4 of MSM wants to take your guns? What actual people have you spoken to who think this way?

Actually most of these city and county law enforcement agencies get the money from seized equipment and bank accounts from drug interdiction. They take everything used in the commission of a crime, sell it and use those funds.

I know this because they buy stuff from me. There are a few grants they can register for but you would be amazed at how much departments have.

I went to a Sheriff's office in Georgia that had two armored APC's, one on tracks and one of tires, a mobile armory with enough weapons to take over a city, a mobile command center that was at least in the 500K range with all its equipment, an armored vehicle, and a tank with a battering ram. All from seized drug funds.

 

[Michael Cole]

Diane Feinstein would disagree with you.

Restricting the types of firearms one can legally possess is not a ban on guns.

 

[Izzy]

Actually most of these city and county law enforcement agencies get the money from seized equipment and bank accounts from drug interdiction. They take everything used in the commission of a crime, sell it and use those funds.

I know this because they buy stuff from me. There are a few grants they can register for but you would be amazed at how much departments have.

I went to a Sheriff's office in Georgia that had two armored APC's, one on tracks and one of tires, a mobile armory with enough weapons to take over a city, a mobile command center that was at least in the 500K range with all its equipment, an armored vehicle, and a tank with a battering ram. All from seized drug funds.

Jesus Christ, I knew prohibition was how we funded the justice system, but in never fails to baffle me how much money gets wasted waging war on chemicals. Make it legal and we could just tax hard drugs to fund free addiction clinics, but I guess those APCs are pretty dope.

 

[Artymoon]

No one has ever proposed a ban on guns. No police have been defunded. I prefer to see the reality of events. Hypotheticals can be interesting, but the OP isn't presented as a hypothetical.

I also like to see reality. Which is why I'm practical and try not to underestimate mob mentality.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Since this is a figment of your imagination, you're going to have to tell me.

Pardon me, but you are the one who disagrees with his Imagination, so maybe you should explain why. After all he spelled out his position. Explain yours.

 

[Michael Cole]

Pardon me, but you are the one who disagrees with his Imagination, so maybe you should explain why. After all he spelled out his position. Explain yours.

I already did.

 

[jotathought]

Restricting the types of firearms one can legally possess is not a ban on guns.

So when the legislation to ban the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons was proposed .. that's not considered banning guns? :roll:

From Diane Feinstein's bill she sponsored:

Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 - (Sec. 3) Amends the federal criminal code to ban the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon, including:

 

[Michael Cole]

So when the legislation to ban the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons was proposed .. that's not considered banning guns? :roll:

From Diane Feinstein's bill she sponsored:

My god. Has everybody forgotten how to use the English language? A "ban on guns" means no one can own a gun. If you are allowed to buy a gun, guns aren't banned. Simple English.

If I own a liquor store, and I stop selling Bud Light, does that mean I don't sell beer?

 

[jotathought]

My god. Has everybody forgotten how to use the English language? A "ban on guns" means no one can own a gun. If you are allowed to buy a gun, guns aren't banned. Simple English.

If I own a liquor store, and I stop selling Bud Light, does that mean I don't sell beer?

Not a good analogy. That's by choice and not by force; however, I'll humor your analogy. If local government says you're only allowed to sell Bud Light .. that's not a ban on alcohol... right? Simple English?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

On the one hand, Lefties say "You shouldn't be allowed to own guns! If you feel threatened, have the cops come to save you!"

Now, from the other side of their mouths, the Lefties are saying "Cops? To hell with cops! There shouldn't be any cops! De-fund the police!"


So if you're not allowed to own guns to save yourself from harm, and if there can't be any cops to save you from harm -- then is the inevitable outcome that you shouldn't be safe from harm?


Or are Lefties just retarded and totally lacking in any basic logic skills or credibility?

I'll tale "False Premises" for literally $256,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.72, Alex.

 

[Good4Nothin]

On the one hand, Lefties say "You shouldn't be allowed to own guns! If you feel threatened, have the cops come to save you!"

Now, from the other side of their mouths, the Lefties are saying "Cops? To hell with cops! There shouldn't be any cops! De-fund the police!"


So if you're not allowed to own guns to save yourself from harm, and if there can't be any cops to save you from harm -- then is the inevitable outcome that you shouldn't be safe from harm?


Or are Lefties just retarded and totally lacking in any basic logic skills or credibility?

Well, if someone breaks into your house, just give them everything. After all, you are privileged and it's your fault they are poor and have to resort to crime.

 

[Michael Cole]

Not a good analogy. That's by choice and not by force; however, I'll humor your analogy. If local government says you're only allowed to sell Bud Light .. that's not a ban on alcohol... right? Simple English?

Screw the analogy. Restrictions and bans are two different things. Really, really simple to understand.