|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] | ||||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
I didn't think we meant taking weapons from people who did nothing wrong.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, LobowolfXXX wrote: I'm not saying they would disappear tomorrow, but where would the career criminals get the from if they aren't in the gun stores, Walmarts and wherever the hell they're legally sold right now. Handguns for self defense, sure if you think it makes you safer. Rifles for the same, or if you like your meat really fresh. Law abiding citizens don't need them and the talking point about well regulated militias is bs imo.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, NYCTwister wrote: I don't even understand the question. They'd get them on the black market, the same place that illegal drug users get drugs, which are illegal.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
Are the guns on the black market manufactured someplace other than where the legally purchased ones are manufactured?
Illegal to sell = less made = less on the black market - leading to less in the hands of criminals. In your opinion do average citizens need these guns, and if so why?
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
My opinion is that "need" is irrelevant. If you're willing to part with all of the things you don't need, I'll pay shipping.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, NYCTwister wrote: Well here is the deal. First off if you don't feel you PERSONALLY don't "need" a rifle then you don't have to purchase and own one. The government should not be allowed to force us to purchase things or services we don't want. (You know like the health care law you like so much.) Don't buy one. It is that simple. But you should not be able based on your own "need" to dictate what others do or do not get to have a RIGHT to. That is not how things in this country work at all. Regardless of "need" people have rights. If you don't like them then amend the constitution. Until then get over it. Do you intend to legislate on what you personally think other people "need"? That is not how things work in our country. You do not take away things from good people because bad people do bad things. What if there was a rash of baseball bat slayings? Then what? How about what to do about manufacturers outside of our country? Want to explain how it is we stop them? No it is just a bad thing to legislate away things from law abiding citizens because some are bad. How about we just punish the bad guys? Lets try that for a while. For a guy who doesn't like big government you certainly seem to advocate for a lot of intervention from one.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
I'm speaking only of very high powered weapons, and no I don't advocate a lot of intervention.
Please stop with the attacks, and the "you just want your opinion to be the only opinion" stuff. Don't you think that there should be a limit to the amount of firepower a citizen should have the right to own? If they're illegal and manufactured outside the country then it would have to be harder to get them, and easier to control. When was the last time a citizen needed an assault rifle to defend themselves? Never mind the fact that any gun is more likely to harm those around them than to be effectively used for self defense. I don't think it's unreasonable to revisit something that was enacted when a musket was pretty much state of the art. Especially when we have evidence that in countries with much stricter gun laws have less gun deaths. If the real argument is that we might have to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government then that's just unrealistic. All this ignores the fact that laws are enacted by those who have largely been bought and sold. Take the money out of politics and a more common sense approach would be applied to a lot of issues.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, LobowolfXXX wrote: If "need" is irrelevant then anything someone "wants" is fine?
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
This has to do with what you want.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, NYCTwister wrote: That doesn't follow, no.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, Dannydoyle wrote: You didn't answer any of my questions, or address any of my points; which is your right of course, but it doesn't make for a good conversation.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, LobowolfXXX wrote: So what is relevant? The sanctity of the 2nd amendment?
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, NYCTwister wrote: Why do you only get to have your questions answered and ignore mine? I do not accept the premise involved in your questions. It doesn't matter if YOU think someone needs something or not.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
NYCTwister Loyal user 267 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2017, Dannydoyle wrote: I thought I addressed yours. Which questions did I ignore?
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
What exactly gives you the right to decide what others need and how does taking weapons away from the law abiding citizen prevent crime?
And had being tougher to get legally ever been a bar to people getting them illegally? I mean drugs and prostitution are fairly tough to get legally. And yet they are a multi billion dollar industry. One could make an argument that some of what drives profit so high is the fact that they are tough to get legally.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On May 14, 2017, Dannydoyle wrote: Is there anything you would restrict law-abiding citizens from owning? Nuclear weapons? Chemical weapons? Tanks? Buckets of heroin? A pet elephant?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Sure. None of those are enshrined in the Constitution in the country in which I live as a right.
Do law abiding citizens already own those things?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Good question. As you know, Danny, you and I are very close to agreement on gun ownership/control.
Freedoms are very important and must be protected. Public safety, however, can't just be swept away in the interests of property rights. The art of governance is the art of striking a balance. And in that, we should reasonably see variation from place to place and from time to time.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Quote:
On May 14, 2017, Magnus Eisengrim wrote: Read our constitution again with slavery in mind. It's about interpretation. Today we have a different problem. The rights of the unliving/undead/virtual as administered by those merely doing their job. What is the good if it does not show a profit on the quarterly returns?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
An establishment is absolutely free to restrict weapons in bars for example.
Gun ownerships is not a property right. You can keep and bear arms.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Halt or I'll shoot you with my Rifle! (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |