Gays & Guns

Posted by: mdmark

I would like to see what people think about these two topics put together. If you vote please leave a comment explaining why.

41 Total Votes

Gun restriction & Gays can marry

Guns and bullets will be restricted. Gay will be able to marry.
17 votes
1 comment

No gun restriction & Gays cannot marry

No restrictions on guns. Gays will be prevented from marrying.
12 votes

No gun restriction & Gays can marry

No restriction on either.
10 votes

Gun restriction & Gays cannot marry

No rights for anyone.
2 votes
1 comment
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Tonius5 says2015-04-09T09:36:42.9392820-05:00
These two issues should not be put together.
GDBH says2015-04-09T09:38:51.1220169-05:00
You're right tonius. These issues have nothing to do with each other.
Squirrelnuts57 says2015-04-09T09:44:48.4487451-05:00
TBR says2015-04-09T09:46:49.9236090-05:00
I would have said that too Tonius5, but I get where he is going.
Travisthetruth says2015-04-09T09:47:28.6576641-05:00
They are both talking about freedom... They should be put together.
TBR says2015-04-09T09:48:31.2592602-05:00
The poll is worded respectively. The permutations are correct and complete.
mdmark says2015-04-09T09:57:43.5942046-05:00
Thank you TBR I've put two separate partisan issues together both regarding rights.
GDBH says2015-04-09T10:17:39.3527414-05:00
@Travisthetruth, "They are both talking about freedom... They should be put together." Non sequitir. The two issues cannot be seen as in any way conflicting.
mdmark says2015-04-09T10:24:46.3098315-05:00
These two issues, GDBH, typically show which party you belong to. They also both pertain to freedom which can classified together
GDBH says2015-04-09T10:34:15.9484767-05:00
@mdmark, "[these two issues] both pertain to freedom" that does NOT mean they belong in the same poll. Freedom of religion and the right to an impartial trial pertain to freedom in their own ways but do not belong together
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-09T10:35:11.9790920-05:00
GDBH, who are you to say what should be in a poll and what should not?
GDBH says2015-04-09T10:37:04.8133155-05:00
@mathgeekjoe, I am not saying that there shouldnt be polls about this topic, just that they are irrelevant and should not be in the same poll. It's two different things.
TBR says2015-04-09T10:42:23.1427074-05:00
Look. To me, its a poll attempting to gauge what the author sees as an inherent contradiction. Now, I can defend my seemingly contradictory stance, but I have no issue with the author attempting to suss this out using this question. Its not really even partisan. It shows the same potential contradiction if you are left or right.
Renegader says2015-04-09T11:34:46.4785131-05:00
I like what he did with this poll. He emphasized that freedom can exist on some partisan issues for both sides. It also makes those who chose one freedom look hypocritical.
GDBH says2015-04-09T12:38:52.3386972-05:00
Crap i has falled for its
U_Wot_M8 says2015-04-09T15:09:06.0124040-05:00
I guess im a typical 'Eurofag' here, i hate the idea of unrestrcted guns in society and im glad we don't have it here. As for gay marrage, yes it should be legal
mdmark says2015-04-10T09:17:05.3531603-05:00
As we can now see, 16 people that voted on this poll are hypocritical. 10 of no guns, yes gays and 6 of no gays, guns.
mdmark says2015-04-10T09:19:30.0422328-05:00
And no one left a comment on why gays should have rights but people with guns shouldn't.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-10T09:26:21.2517868-05:00
It isn't hypocritical, you can support one thing yet not another.
TBR says2015-04-10T09:27:18.1780209-05:00
No right is absolute. Gun rights and gun control are not in complete conflict. Further, as interesting as the juxtaposition of the issues is, fulfillment of LGBT rights are far behind gun rights.
Travisthetruth says2015-04-10T09:28:27.9369505-05:00
If you are pro gay and anti gun you are a hypocrite and the same can be said for pro gunners against gays. That's why i said they are both freedoms and go hand in hand.
TBR says2015-04-10T09:29:27.1690114-05:00
There is no rational voice speaking to removing all guns right. Talking about LGBT rights is just barely becoming tolerable to most.
TBR says2015-04-10T09:33:08.9343466-05:00
The problem comes in, as I was point out, with restriction. It is not hypocritical to discuss restrictions on "guns" and still support the 2nd A
Varrack says2015-04-10T09:33:51.6307255-05:00
How are they contradictory?
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-10T09:34:49.2929910-05:00
I personally think there should be some gun restrictions, but the average gun control you hear about I am against. Seriously how is limiting the amount of bullets you can buy going to do anything?
TBR says2015-04-10T09:35:02.9057548-05:00
@Varrack - You asking me? Can you ask again with a little more detail?
Varrack says2015-04-10T09:39:21.3303850-05:00
Mdmark is claiming that if you have certain stances on these topics then your views are contradictory and you're a hypocrite. However, he hasn't explained why that is, so I'm a bit confused.
TBR says2015-04-10T09:40:24.9303619-05:00
@Varrack - Got it. I can explain, but think its better to let the author explain his thinking.
mdmark says2015-04-10T12:09:29.7047437-05:00
I believe that people should be free from infringement of rights. I think both should be unrestricted. If I infringe on someone else's right what is to stop them from infringing on mine? The natural state of mankind is one of equality, in which free and independent individuals live without any subordination or subjection.
TBR says2015-04-10T12:14:50.5281739-05:00
@mdmark - since the "gun" right says nothing of "guns" but arms, do you believe you have an unrestricted right to any arm? Any gun?
mdmark says2015-04-10T12:16:47.2829772-05:00
If you can afford it you should be able to buy it and use it.
GDBH says2015-04-10T12:18:04.6196413-05:00
Outside of criminal stuff
TBR says2015-04-10T12:18:39.6253681-05:00
@mdmark - Not attempting to push, but am asking for intellectual honesty. No limit? Weaponized anthrax? Anything.
TBR says2015-04-10T12:19:56.0326987-05:00
@GDBH - What does that mean?
GDBH says2015-04-10T12:56:57.5235769-05:00
@ TBR, criminal use of guns is bad and will happen whether guns are legal are not. If we let citizens that already have a tendency to abide by the law have guns just for self-defense, they'll be able to defend themselves and wont do anything else with them.
TBR says2015-04-10T13:03:06.4876813-05:00
@GDBH - I see. Then the comment is not germane to what I am asking.
mdmark says2015-04-10T13:11:31.5123691-05:00
You mean like anthrax coated bullets or something?
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-10T13:13:57.4007635-05:00
You really wouldn't coat bullets with anthrax, viral glass with some unvaccinated strain of rabies would be far worse.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-10T13:16:02.5883560-05:00
Have any of you read the Cobra Event?
TBR says2015-04-10T14:11:22.3831237-05:00
@mdmark - do what you wish with it as far as "tactical" (talk to mathgeek). That's not the point. The question is, do you think people should be allowed to weapons of any type, including but not limited to anthrax.
mdmark says2015-04-13T13:55:35.7496629-05:00
But Guns and anthrax aren't the same thing.
TBR says2015-04-13T13:57:56.5672521-05:00
@mdmark - so there is a rational limit on the RTKBA, right?
GDBH says2015-04-13T14:12:13.6092761-05:00
@TBR, no it is not. You asked me for an explanation of what I meant and I gave you one.
TBR says2015-04-13T14:14:23.6475417-05:00
@GDBH - You gave your comment, and I accepted it. It is not germane to what I am asking, that's all.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.