Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why do people belieeve in gun rights?

Mickeymouseman
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 11:03:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Seriosuly I want to know.

Do you like Mass Murders? Are YOU a serial killer? I just don't understand.

Guns are nothing but an open invite for serial killers. Might as well just put a message on them saying here i am murderers, come and get me!!!!
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 11:51:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
*facepalm* (haven't done that in a while)

Just because someone misuses an object doesn't mean the masses should be devoid of their rights to use and own said object. People crash their cars all the time, killing innocents. Should we ban cars? Do you believe in the right to own a car? How about a knife? Or even your bare hands? Those can be used to kill.

This argument is so fallacious it's stupid.

The misuse of a few does not beget the rights of the many. In fact, this argument is is the Misleading Vividness Fallacy where one or two shocking events has outweighed the logic of statistics. Not that people like yourself really ever pay attention to logic or statistics.

/rant
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 11:55:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is essentially why I believe individuals should have an effective means to defend themselves from contemporary threats: http://tinyurl.com....
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 11:57:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Going off CP's post, it's also ironic that people who claim to be "cracking down on gun violence" are themselves the ones advocating the most fervent and comprehensive gun violence. For how could one deprive hundreds of millions of people their natural right to self-defense without using violence or the threat of violence, kidnapping, and caging?
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:00:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Just now realizing the OP is satire. But nonetheless, there is no study that proves the incidence of violent crime increases when more law-abiding citizens own firearms. If there is, please post it without incoherent, overly-effusive drivel.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:01:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 11:57:51 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Going off CP's post, it's also ironic that people who claim to be "cracking down on gun violence" are themselves the ones advocating the most fervent and comprehensive gun violence. For how could one deprive hundreds of millions of people their natural right to self-defense without using violence or the threat of violence, kidnapping, and caging?

This is stupid. What you're doing is deluding yourself
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:02:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 11:57:51 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Going off CP's post, it's also ironic that people who claim to be "cracking down on gun violence" are themselves the ones advocating the most fervent and comprehensive gun violence. For how could one deprive hundreds of millions of people their natural right to self-defense without using violence or the threat of violence, kidnapping, and caging?

I agree. People who want to deprive people of guns will have to use massive amounts of force in order to do so.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:05:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 11:03:21 AM, Mickeymouseman wrote:
Seriosuly I want to know.

Do you like Mass Murders? Are YOU a serial killer? I just don't understand.

Guns are nothing but an open invite for serial killers. Might as well just put a message on them saying here i am murderers, come and get me!!!!

Yes, because only the police and military can be trusted to have guns, they wouldn't kill anybody. Oh wait, police kill more Americans than terrorists and governments are the number one natural cause of unnatural death killing 250,000,000 people in the last century.

How do you ban guns? You need men with guns to confiscate other men with guns.

You are an idiot and so is Double_R.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:08:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:01:27 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/11/2013 11:57:51 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Going off CP's post, it's also ironic that people who claim to be "cracking down on gun violence" are themselves the ones advocating the most fervent and comprehensive gun violence. For how could one deprive hundreds of millions of people their natural right to self-defense without using violence or the threat of violence, kidnapping, and caging?

This is stupid. What you're doing is deluding yourself

Please refrain from baseless insults and instead attempt to deconstruct my argument.

P1. Some people who are reactionaries to gun violence want all (or most) guns to be taken away by government
P2. In order for all (or most) guns to be taken away by government, violence and/or the threat of violence (kidnapping, caging, extortion, etc) must be used by the state to accomplish that goal
C. Some people who are reactionaries to gun violence propose "solutions" which enables much more gun violence, kidnapping, and caging than previously existed

The argument could also be made using Harvard University, John Lott, University of Chicago, etc statistics to demonstrate that taking away guns from legal use drastically increases the incidence of crime in those areas. Thus, some people who are reactionaries to gun violence propose "solutions" that not only tremendously increase gun violence by the state, but increase the incidence of violent crime in general.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:17:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
WSA I'm just going by the posts you make. You seem very much to be projecting, especially with that post just there, not wanting to be on the side of all the death and destruction. Which is decent. But then you've lost the run of yourself I think.

You might consider the person against guns just as against guns. Though I am Irish and we did have a war over peace.

And maybe you're just troll like mickeymouseman lol
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:30:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:19:32 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
People have messed up ways of looking at the world.

Please refrain from making bold statements without any logical, philosophical or factual backing.

Thanks,
Everyone at DDO
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:30:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:17:40 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
WSA I'm just going by the posts you make. You seem very much to be projecting, especially with that post just there, not wanting to be on the side of all the death and destruction. Which is decent. But then you've lost the run of yourself I think.

You might consider the person against guns just as against guns. Though I am Irish and we did have a war over peace.

And maybe you're just troll like mickeymouseman lol

I don't think this post made any sense at all. Either that or I'm having a stroke.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:36:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:30:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 6/11/2013 12:19:32 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
People have messed up ways of looking at the world.

Please refrain from making bold statements without any logical, philosophical or factual backing.

Thanks,
Everyone at DDO

WSA just wrote off people against guns as murderous. And then people argue against sh*t with stupid principles all the time. Government is bad, not considering what the person wants at all, but what they want as regards your stupid principles. He literally wrote off anyone against guns as murderous.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:39:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:30:56 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 6/11/2013 12:17:40 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
WSA I'm just going by the posts you make. You seem very much to be projecting, especially with that post just there, not wanting to be on the side of all the death and destruction. Which is decent. But then you've lost the run of yourself I think.

You might consider the person against guns just as against guns. Though I am Irish and we did have a war over peace.

And maybe you're just troll like mickeymouseman lol

I don't think this post made any sense at all. Either that or I'm having a stroke.

It made sense dude.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:40:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." US Bill of rights

"[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.

[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state."~ NH Bill of rights

Preventive laws don't prevent crime, they just increase the penalties for committing crime, while subjecting the law abiding citizens to the same penalties. Preventive laws only serve as an 8th amendment loop hole.

Increased penalties does not prevent crime. It increases the opportunity to commit crime, while reducing the number of criminals willing to risk the consequences. The result is an increase in crime, but a decrease in the number of criminals committing crimes. Gun laws control may decrease the number of people committing gun crimes, but it would increase the frequency of gun crime due to the increased opportunity.

http://www.debate.org...
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:41:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
CP you didn't even spot mickeymouseman was a troll, so...

"we might as well put a message on the guns saying i'm right here come and get me!!" lol

Granted they follow me around though, but only because I'm sexy ;D
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:45:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:36:55 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
WSA just wrote off people against guns as murderous. And then people argue against sh*t with stupid principles all the time. Government is bad, not considering what the person wants at all, but what they want as regards your stupid principles. He literally wrote off anyone against guns as murderous.

He didn't write them off, he provided a logical justification for it. Yes, people who want to ban guns want mass death, mass genocide, and everyone turned into victims. Australia did door to door gun confiscation and killed Crocodile Dundee in a shootout. Gun banners want that.

WSA provided the following argument which you failed to refute:

P1. Some people who are reactionaries to gun violence want all (or most) guns to be taken away by government
P2. In order for all (or most) guns to be taken away by government, violence and/or the threat of violence (kidnapping, caging, extortion, etc) must be used by the state to accomplish that goal
C. Some people who are reactionaries to gun violence propose "solutions" which enables much more gun violence, kidnapping, and caging than previously existed
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 12:47:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Because mickeymouseman is a stupid name
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
conservative_18
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2013 10:29:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
For one, the Constitution states that people have the right to bear arms. Government CAN NOT take them away. Second, it isn't the gun that kills people, the person shooting it isn't he one killing people. The PEOPLE should be controlled, NOT the guns.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 2:50:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 11:51:21 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Just because someone misuses an object doesn't mean the masses should be devoid of their rights to use and own said object. People crash their cars all the time, killing innocents. Should we ban cars? Do you believe in the right to own a car? How about a knife? Or even your bare hands? Those can be used to kill.

26 people wouldn't be dead if Adam Lanza walked into Newtown Elementary with a knife.

The misuse of a few does not beget the rights of the many.

So is it your belief that we should not have to take our shoes off at the airport?
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 2:53:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/11/2013 12:05:55 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
You are an idiot and so is Double_R.

Impressive. You've really stumped me with this one.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 3:49:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/12/2013 2:53:13 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 6/11/2013 12:05:55 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
You are an idiot and so is Double_R.

Impressive. You've really stumped me with this one.

I like you man and think you're a smart guy
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2013 3:38:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Why do people belieeve in gun rights?"

Because the police can't protect you during times of anarchy.

Ya, it happens, believe it or not .
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%