Your previous statement was irrelevant to what I said, didn’t address the main issue.
False. The second the father started keeping his gun not locked up, he was no longer being a responsible gun owner- regardless of whether an incident happened or not.
What issue? Youre argument, and that if many “anti-gin” people, builds your/their thesis on information that is false. Therefore many of your points are invalid. It’s simple logic.
it also boils down to; the people of the state should allow thr state to own the monopoly on violence, because of a few outliers.
Your entire argument is built on a an appeal to emotion, and doesn’t even consider the context of why any state would allow it’s people to own weapons to begin with. You fail to address any concerns and always respond with a because, or some idiotic clause that appeals to the “value of life lost”
People like you are the reason why the NRA got as hawkish as it did, and the reason why even moderates refuse reforms. You can’t even build a simplle argument that addresses co cerns, how can you be trusted to not push legislation that’s bullshit insane.
what the fuck you got against anti-gin people? I hate that shit, tastes like aftershave.
Why the fuck are you drinking aftershave you dumb fuck
Goes down smoother than perfume, if bums are to be believed.
But is it smoother then hairspray, mouthwash or hand sanitizer?
What are the tiers for best material to get wasted on?
What something was designed for is irrelevant. If we used everything for what it was originally intended then life would be pretty shit right now.
The Haber process was designed to make bombs in WWI, yet it is used by every developed country for fertilizer. In fact most of the nitrogen in your body is there thanks to this process. Computers were designed to calculate bomb trajectories not play video games on. Viagra was designed to treat blood pressure related illness not to help 50 year old men to get it up.
What it was designed to do is irrelevant. What it actually does do in reality is relevant.
But the bums I know have Windex as their preferred drink.
Ben Carson Claims He Faced a Gunman in Popeye’s and Kindly Redirected Him to the Cashier - https://news.yahoo.com/ben-carson-claims-faced-gunman-145602801.html
Don’t kill me, kill the Popeyes cashier.
I wonder how Ben Carson would handle a war.
So he basically suggested that you dont want to steal from me or the other patrons, you want to steal from the multinational corp (or at least franchisee) which is likely insured against this sort of thing and everybody lived with wallets intact despite using nothing but Carson’s brain (thought the left would like that sort of thing; hahaa).
But the media convinced you that he is a coward that cant handle conflict (maybe, maybe not - i dont know). Just like they have convinced you that shooting violence is at all time high crisis levels (just because it is overepresented on thenews); just like they have convinced you that mass shootings deaths (which maintains a fuzzy definition in itself) are at epidemic proportion compared to inner city criminal shooting violence deaths;Just like they have convinced you the fully automatic weapons are commonly owned by gun rights advocates; just like they have convinced you that fully automatic weapons are involved in any capacity in these mass shootings; just like they have convinced you that the term ‘assault weapon’ is not a political invention (intentionally designed to captialise on public ignorance conflating the term with that of ‘assault rifle’ leading to a series of legislations based on nothing but weaponry aesthetics…).
The president comes on TV/radio hours after the fact talking about tougher regs wil protect us from this stuff before we even got any details about how the killer obtained his weapons etc… thus without even being able to know if specifc regs would have helped. And noboday called him out on that. Because nobody seems to care about thinking critically.
I’m not attempting to be funny or derail the topic but is there anyone explaining how or why most of these disturbed individuals are mostly male and white?
Any book or article regarding this?
Because non-white people shooting each other up doesn’t make headlines. Besides, why should the media care about what happens in the less-savory parts of large cities/urban areas? They want to make as much of a fuss as possible, and baiting people into getting angry over the skin color of the murderer involved is a pretty good way of, oh, say, distracting people from much larger issues like the fact that the TPP got passed while people were busy raging over the Oregon school shooter.
Classic misdirection, and people fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
Are you surprised? Everybody who identifies as something other than liberal/democrat is the villain. With that said I don’t think Carson actually believes all the crap he says either.
Well, what I meant by “designed to do” meant to include how well it does whatever it was designed to do. The car example is poor because, for what the car was designed to do, it does very well and banning cars would have a detrimental negative effect on our life.
A gun’s purpose is to kill and it performs it’s task very effectively. There are far more ways that a gun can be used in a dangerous manner that puts the lives of innocent people in danger. This is why I posed those questions, is the necessity of hunting and gun collecting enough to outweigh the chaos caused by guns?
The self defense argument is a tougher one to answer, but we know that there are very few cases in which a civilian has used a gun to stop a crime in progress, especially in comparison to how many times it has been used to kill innocent people.
And on a sidenote, ANOTHER school shooting happened today, in Arizona:
Alright it looks like you didn’t understand the argument so I’ll make it clear.
I believe that the main points surrounding why guns should be legal, were flawed…I asked the gun-supporters to lay out the support for each of those points and why they believe those outweigh the clear dangers of guns, so we can have a discussion about it. You didn’t address any of it, you just responded with some misunderstood comments regarding what I was saying.
Someone else for example, responded that some of these places have a big wild animal problem, where hunting is almost a necessity. It’s understandable from a self-defense standpoint against these wild animals.
And we got a second school shooting today, if one wasn’t enough:
Looks like we need more guns, right?
Considering both shootings happened in the magical “gun free zone”…
Fixed.