Which do you support most and why? (Select 1 or more)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mustapha00

Well-Known Member
The meaning of the Second Amendment is pretty clear to anyone with more than two functioning brain cells.

However, that disqualifies almost all Progressives, so it has to be "Conserva-splained" to them in the most basic of language so they can wrap their teeny-tiny brains around the concept.

Progressives here cling to the most absolutist interpretation of an 'argument'. In this particular example, they attempt to invalidate lucifer's list because not ALL of the groups he named want to ban ALL guns from ALL people.

Sort of like "it depends on what the meaning of "is" is". It's amusing to see Proggies get all bent out of shape when called upon to defend their 'points'.

To the OP's original point: "E". While a coconut, in and of itself, cannot kill an individual absent some causation (such as a weakened stem which, aided by a breeze, breaks and allows gravity to take over, with the result that someone gets conked on the noggin by said coconut), the same is true of a gun; it cannot suddenly decide to discharge itself and inflict harm upon an individual.
 

Polani

Member
My fact is actually correct about the coconuts. Because A gun does not just kill someone. Someone with a gun would be the one to kill another person. Therefore since guns do not just kill people on their own. The the fact that you are more likely to be hit on the head by a coconut than be shot and killed by a gun is correct. So if you want to argue logic then read what was stated.
Coconuts don't kill people; gravity kills people. Don't blame a coconut for following the law of inertia, man. Stop spreading lies and anti-coconut propaganda.
 

Big-Bendz

Active Member
This has been an interesting conversation so far. So here is some additional information. As a student of the Constitution and some of the thoughts of the people behind it, the 2nd amendment was to allow the Citizens to keep their government honest. This brings up the debate of: is it better for citizens to freely have guns or not? The left seems to think that banning guns will prevent people from being killed. Here they mention things like children getting hold of the guns and shooting themselves or others, the cases of crazy people shooting up schools or movie theatres, etc. But they leave out the biggest gun crimes of all time. I will only mention 2 but they are doozies. Hitler prevented the Jews from owning guns and then killed millions who at that point had no way to defend themselves. Stalin banned guns from his own citizens and millions died. So would it have been better to have been armed or not armed?
 

jaelis

Well-Known Member
Interesting question, but then you have to wonder if the Jews or Russians had had guns, would things have gone any differently? Honest question, I don't think it is easy to answer either way.

Not totally analogous, but I'm pretty that in present-day America, the chance of an African-American being killed by the government is considerably higher if they own a gun than if they don't.
 

Queen Cubberly

Active Member
I believe that if people want to kill, they will kill by any means they can. There's stabbings, bombings, poisonings, strangling, drownings...the list goes on and on. No matter what law or regulation is passed, especially among gun owners, the bad ones will go to jail/prison and the law abiding ones will remain free to keep protecting the innocent ones from the bad ones. It will never end, it is a continuous cycle. Heroes and villains.
 

Polani

Member
I believe that if people want to kill, they will kill by any means they can. There's stabbings, bombings, poisonings, strangling, drownings...the list goes on and on..
You have a point, but you did not factor in the extremely high number of accidental deaths involving guns.
One option that was not listed in the original post is:
I. Improper or inadequate background checks, screenings, and education on gun safety kills people.
 

Queen Cubberly

Active Member
You have a point, but you did not factor in the extremely high number of accidental deaths involving guns.
One option that was not listed in the original post is:
I. Improper or inadequate background checks, screenings, and education on gun safety kills people.
I believe that gun owners who do not keep their guns properly secured and in their possession at all times, should be held liable for anything that happens to anyone else, by anyone else. Naturally there is robberies, muggings and such, that a criminal can take a law abiding citizens gun away, I realize that There are millions of accidental deaths, by car, by alcohol, legal drugs...question is, how do we control all of that too?
 

Queen Cubberly

Active Member
It does make me extremely sad and upset when I hear a story on the news of a child accidentally killing another child or themselves. It makes me want to blame the parents, but then, they might not have known where the gun came from. So many reasons why it could have happened, but still...its sad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.