• 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!

The real reason the anti gun crowd has a problem with armed self defense with a gun!

RF667799 said:
To use a car with the GPS disabled doesn't have to be legal either. And isn't.

Are you shortly going to point out the great difference between motor vehicles and guns that you thing requires draconian and intrusive laws in the case of one, but not the other? Or you know...just point out why you are opposed to even the minor inconvenience of UBCs, which you seem to think would be so effective and enforceable in the case of guns.
Click to expand...
UBC’s are just one tool.
 
brianpatrick said:
I have an employee right now who is incapable (legally) of starting his car or driving for more than 30 minutes without blowing into his breathalyzer. Hey, good idea! We could also put breathalyzers on guns along with the trackers. That way no drunks can use them.
Click to expand...

You should be pleased that it is being considered that shortly, all cars will have a breathalyzer.

You bring up a good point though. Why is that guy even allowed to own a car, given he has demonstrated his willingness to commit criminal acts with one? If he had committed a criminal act with a gun...or even without a gun...he wouldn't be allowed to possess a gun.
 
RF667799 said:
You should be pleased that it is being considered that shortly, all cars will have a breathalyzer.

You bring up a good point though. Why is that guy even allowed to own a car, given he has demonstrated his willingness to commit criminal acts with one? If he had committed a criminal act with a gun...or even without a gun...he wouldn't be allowed to possess a gun.
Click to expand...
This is the circle you’re running. Guns are for killing people and other things, and cars are for transporting humans over distances. Some of the other things guns can be used for: hunting (fine), target shooting (a lot of targets are shaped like… humans😃), competition (fine), shooting burglars after your TV (insurance is probably better for that), shooting people, and killing yourself.
 
brianpatrick said:
This is the circle you’re running. Guns are for killing people and other things, and cars are for transporting humans over distances. Some of the other things guns can be used for: hunting (fine), target shooting (a lot of targets are shaped like… humans😃), competition (fine), shooting burglars after your TV (insurance is probably better for that), shooting people, and killing yourself.
Click to expand...

How am I running in a circle, when your argument is classically circular?

Guns can be used to kill people. Granted.

Cars can be used to kill people.

Now, how do you get to "Guns are for killing people..." without simultaneously demonstrating "cars are for killing people"?
 
RF667799 said:
How am I running in a circle, when your argument is classically circular?

Guns can be used to kill people. Granted.

Cars can be used to kill people.

Now, how do you get to "Guns are for killing people..." without simultaneously demonstrating "cars are for killing people"?
Click to expand...
Have you ever played the game called “owning da libs?” On conservative chat boards and social media, it’s where you set up a honeypot OP, and then screenshot the “dumb” libs responses, and post them on the board so cons can laugh at them.

Well, we libs also play that game. You’re a goldmine of funny circular logic.
 
brianpatrick said:
Have you ever played the game called “owning da libs?” On conservative chat boards and social media, it’s where you set up a honeypot OP, and then screenshot the “dumb” libs responses, and post them on the board so cons can laugh at them.

Well, we libs also play that game. You’re a goldmine of funny circular logic.
Click to expand...

No, I've never played that game. It sounds like trolling. I don't think this qualifies anyway, because it isn't particularly liberal to call for draconian, intrusive government policy.

I note you haven't actually pointed out any circular logic. You just keep demonstrating your example of begging the question, which is a form of circular argument.

You aren't going to be able to demonstrate that guns are "for killing people", are you?

You aren't going to support something as simple and marginally intrusive as UBCs in the case of another item that is used to kill and enables criminal activity, are you?
 
brianpatrick said:
Yeah that’s good but it’s not enough. Apparently. I’ll bet with the new spatial technology we could make a gun you can’t point at yourself.
Click to expand...
I already don't point guns at myself.
 
brianpatrick said:
Yeah that’s good but it’s not enough. Apparently. I’ll bet with the new spatial technology we could make a gun you can’t point at yourself.
Click to expand...

For now, you should concentrate on making an argument that doesn't point back at yourself.
 
Rucker61 said:
I already don't point guns at myself.
Click to expand...
10’s of thousands do. In the US we are only as strong as our weakest link. Sorry, I drive like a professional, but I can’t drive 100 mph because our weakest links are shitty drivers.
 
brianpatrick said:
10’s of thousands do. In the US we are only as strong as our weakest link. Sorry, I drive like a professional, but I can’t drive 100 mph because our weakest links are shitty drivers.
Click to expand...

What prevents you from driving 100mph? If you have no need to drive 100mph, why not have your vehicle with a mandated limit of 35 mph? All vehicles used on public roads. That would indisputably save many lives. It would be inconvenient though, right? Especially for someone who drives like a professional and is such an obviously superior specimen of a steering wheel holder.
 
brianpatrick said:
10’s of thousands do. In the US we are only as strong as our weakest link. Sorry, I drive like a professional, but I can’t drive 100 mph because our weakest links are shitty drivers.
Click to expand...
If your driving is dependent upon the weakest link, you don't get to drive at all.
 
brianpatrick said:
10’s of thousands do. In the US we are only as strong as our weakest link. Sorry, I drive like a professional, but I can’t drive 100 mph because our weakest links are shitty drivers.
Click to expand...

Which reminds me. One of our weak links recently used his motor vehicle to massacre a bunch of people at a Christmas Parade. But UBCs that might have prevented that, are too inconvenient.
 
So; It's mostly agreed the Auto is The Weapon of choice to cause Draconian hell out of hell on the Population mostly and the highest cost estimates mean even more future hell for the innocent to endure ! See its the right to Drive that is the most damaging thing about Freedom. Of Course the Smart phone comes next along with Elon's plan to create a citizenry of Chipped Insane wanders ! Another Oligarchs verson of hell on Earth ! Do I believe in his vision of Man living on Mars ? Hell no !
 
Last edited:
P_T said:
So; It's mostly agreed the Auto is The Weapon of choice to cause Draconian hell out of hell on the Population mostly and the highest cost estimates mean even more future hell for the innocent to endure ! See its the right to Drive that is the most damaging thing about Freedom. Of Course the Smart phone comes next along with Elon's plan to create a citizenry of Chipped Insane wanders ! Another Oligarchs verson of hell on Earth ! Do I believe in his vision of Man living on Mars ? Hell no !
Click to expand...

What's "draconian hell", how does this differ from ordinary hell ?
 
RF667799 said:
Which reminds me. One of our weak links recently used his motor vehicle to massacre a bunch of people at a Christmas Parade. But UBCs that might have prevented that, are too inconvenient.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and guns were designed to kill people with. Pretty straight forward. You should get with NRA for better more up to date analogies.
 
brianpatrick said:
Yeah, and guns were designed to kill people with. Pretty straight forward. You should get with NRA for better more up to date analogies.
Click to expand...

Repeating an assertion that you failed so badly to support....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom