Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

@RABEL222,

Quote:

Talking to you and baldy is like talking to a brick wall. Except the brick wall has more awareness of what its saying.

So explain how "universal background checks" would have stopped any of the mass shootings that have taken place? Explain how you are going to track the private sales of guns to make sure the background check system is being used?

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

More nonsense from you.

Pointing out all the places where you are wrong is hardly nonsense.

MontereyJack wrote:

Gun "rights"

This is why it is important to keep voting for Trump and the Republicans. They protect us from leftists who say that our rights are imaginary.

MontereyJack wrote:

zealotry for ease of access and as nearly universal possession of guns as possible is clearly putting guns in the hands of thousands of people who Are going to use them for the purpose for which they were invented in the first place, i.e. to kill someone else, which deprives those people killed of their essential human rights.

"Not depriving someone of their rights when they have committed no wrongdoing" is hardly zealotry.

MontereyJack wrote:

That deprivation of humn rights is inextricably tied up with the use of guns.. not theoretical use but ACTUAL violation of civil rights.

That is incorrect. Statistics are very clear that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Talking to you and baldy is like talking to a brick wall. Except the brick wall has more awareness of what its saying.

Leftism and low quality arguments go hand-in-hand.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

The goal is clear and hasn't changed:as closely as we possibly can to at least greatly reduce and if at all humanly possible, eliminate gun violence. As the vigil protestors who shouted down the governor of Ohio said with one voice, "DO SOMETHING". Inaction is not a viable option. We can start with baby steps, as Trump has proposed, but if those have no effect or minimal effect, as they very well may, the steps will escalate until the violence stops. Start with background checks and red flag laws, upgrade to a new assault-style weapons and lsrge ammo clips ban as they seem to be beoming the weapon of choice. Go from there til the shootings stop. The legislators have tofigure out how to do what we tell them to do. If they don't vote the suckers out.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Thinking we're wrong is where the nonsense is.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Not nonsense at all.

You were very wrong to say that gun rights cause any deaths.

You were very wrong to say that the right is against all gun restrictions.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

The goal is clear and hasn't changed:as closely as we possibly can to at least greatly reduce and if at all humanly possible, eliminate gun violence.

If that was the goal, why all the crazed efforts to violate people's civil liberties for no reason?

Also, why does it matter if someone is killed with a gun verses killed with some other weapon?

MontereyJack wrote:

As the vigil protestors who shouted down the governor of Ohio said with one voice, "DO SOMETHING". Inaction is not a viable option.

So long as the left refuses to compromise and/or demands to violate people's civil liberties for no reason, inaction is what you're going to get.

MontereyJack wrote:

We can start with baby steps, as Trump has proposed, but if those have no effect or minimal effect, as they very well may, the steps will escalate until the violence stops. Start with background checks and red flag laws,

If the left wants to compromise, perhaps something can be worked out. But historically the left has refused to compromise. We'll see what happens. I won't hold my breath.

MontereyJack wrote:

upgrade to a new assault-style weapons and lsrge ammo clips ban as they seem to be beoming the weapon of choice. Go from there til the shootings stop.

Sorry. The left will not be allowed to violate people's civil liberties for fun.

MontereyJack wrote:

The legislators have tofigure out how to do what we tell them to do. If they don't vote the suckers out.

We voters in rural areas are telling our legislators to protect our civil liberties.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

The goal is clear and hasn't changed:as closely as we possibly can to at least greatly reduce and if at all humanly possible, eliminate gun violence.

Except you fail to explain how these expanded background checks would prevent mass shootings. None of the shooters purchased their guns from a private sale, they were all purchased legally at FFL gun shops.

Quote:

As the vigil protestors who shouted down the governor of Ohio said with one voice, "DO SOMETHING". Inaction is not a viable option.

Wrong action is also not a viable option as we are dealing with Constitutional Rights. They might be rights you don't like or respect, but they are Constitutional Rights none the less.

Quote:

We can start with baby steps, as Trump has proposed, but if those have no effect or minimal effect, as they very well may, the steps will escalate until the violence stops.

Are you looking for zero deaths from guns, or are you looking for reasonable reduction of like 50%?

Quote:

Start with background checks and red flag laws, upgrade to a new assault-style weapons and lsrge ammo clips ban as they seem to be beoming the weapon of choice. Go from there til the shootings stop.

We already have background checks, how will "expanded" background checks on private sales work to stop the shootings? Do you expect the gang members who haven't done background checks to start them now?

Quote:

The legislators have tofigure out how to do what we tell them to do. If they don't vote the suckers out.

The problem is not all Americans think the way to solve the problem is the same way you do, in fact the left can't answer many questions about how their idea's will stop the violence, except to say "Then take the guns away." That isn't an answer either, you would need to change the Constitution and you don't have anywhere near the votes to do so.

Before you say no one has said to take the guns. That would be a lie. There was an IL politician who just made that very claim when she was being questioned by one of her voters.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/20/julie-morrison-illinois-state-senator-raises-gun-c/

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

I would rather talk to the brick wall. It will have more understanding of what I am saying and is smart enough to keep its mouth shut rather than show its stupidity by saying stupid stuff.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

It might help if we held gum manufactures responsible for the violence they have caused with their nra rhetoric.A few 100 million law suits might make them aware of the viloence. Hitting the pocket book seems tomake business aware of their responsibilities like nothing else.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

Federal law says that if anyone tries to sue a gun manufacturer, the case must be automatically thrown out of court, and then their homes and retirement accounts must be seized and used to pay the gun manufacturer's lawyers for the time that they took to have the case automatically dismissed.

It's a good law. It's quite effective.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

Quote:

I would rather talk to the brick wall.

That's because they are compliant to your silly solutions.

Quote:

It will have more understanding of what I am saying and is smart enough to keep its mouth shut rather than show its stupidity by saying stupid stuff.

You don't even understand what you are saying. You are too stupid to understand that your solutions won't work. You refuse to have a discussion because you know when questioned about the facts of your solutions, your solutions fall apart. They can't stand up to simple questions .

How would universal background checks have stopped those shootings? Easy, they wouldn't have. In fact they would have stopped none of the shootings, that's what you anti-second amendment zealots won't admit.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

No. Its because they understand what I am saying and don't lie very much.

1 Reply

One way to stop these shootings would be to kill all Americans. Oh wait, that's what they're doing... ok then, keep it up.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Why is it that rightists always come down on the side of death?

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

It’s not the side of death, it’s the side of freedom! It’s not the stench of fear they love, it’s the sweet aroma of civil liberty!! (It’s just coincidental that it smells like the nitro/graphite mixture of recent gunfire)

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

Quote:

No. Its because they understand what I am saying and don't lie very much.

I've told no lies in the gun debate.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Why is it that rightists always come down on the side of death?

Sorry, but it's the left that comes down on the side of death. Gun free zones? A majority of the mass shootings take place in "gun free" zones. We want people to be able to defend themselves and not be victims. You want to disarm the populace and leave them at the mercy of mass killers. Sorry dude, but you support death by not letting people defend themselves.

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

We want to disarm the killers, mass killers or plain old garden variety killers, whatever it takes. The right is prevenyting any steps to that aim. That means the right is coming down on the side of death. That is the plain and simple truth. As the crowds at the vigil shouted down the goverboir of ohio, 'DO SOMETHING'. Doing nothing is unacceptable, and that's what the right is doing. If you don't like gun control, come upp with something that works, or we will do whatever it takes, no matter whether or not the gun zealots don't like it. The statu quo is not acceptable.. Look at the polls. The large majority of the country supports stricter gun laws. 2020 is coming uo, and your side lost badly in 2018 and you've just allowed the situation to get worse, and the country get more and more pissed off at it.

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

And may I remind uyou, the cops took out the shooter within 32 seconds, but he still killed 9 and wounded 27 in those few seonds, The good guy with the gun still lost badly to the bad guy with the gun. To update the political slogan, it's the guns, stupid.

0 Replies

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know