Dangerous Democrats Part Three -- a New Star is Born

I vote that its you anti 2nd amendment people that have to come get the guns......

Say when....

a reply to: Greven

And completely unneccesary to point out in adult conversations.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Greven


It was not an argument it was a statement, if you want to debate the subject try bringing facts to support your side.


The 2nd was around before I was born, it did not invalidate the right it was there because it was in the bill of rights.

When I die I hope for it to still be there, and if you want to tell me it should be curtailed/removed you should bring facts to support yourself because you should expect pushback.

You want a formal argument?

The 2nd Amendment is the right to keep and bear arms.
To exercise a right, one must be alive.
Thus, to exercise the 2nd Amendment requires one to be alive.

It didn't apply to you before you were born, nor will it apply to you after you die.

These children are concerned about guns killing them before they are even permitted to exercise that 2nd Amendment right.

Is the 2nd Amendment superior to the inherent right to live?

So you think either 2nd or death.

You equate gun ownership to 100% certain death.

You are a book burner. You want to deny rights and can only go to the extreme comparison.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan


Do you know the difference between civil rights and inalienable rights? Therein lies your answer.

I don't see any other inalienable rights up for debate. Maybe we need less freedom of speech? Or privacy?

inalienable right - (noun) a right according to natural law, a right that cannot be taken away, denied, or transferred.

Guns are not a inalienable right and may not even be a civil right and that is your guys problem, you think they are a natural law given to you by God or whatever. The gun laws were made by men who included it into the constitution and that same constitution made it so that it may be changed by congress and is not set in stone. If they did not think this right was subject to change, they would not have made it so that it could be.

a reply to: UKTruth


It was the so called Progressive agenda 20 or so years ago that all of a sudden the "SHRINKS" decided it was horrendous to discipline your children in a manner not dictated by THEM.


I wonder how the school shootings have increased since we have bought into the BS the "Head Doctors" on behalf of TPTB have been promoting.


In other words, how many children have committed murder since the government has gotten involved in how parents discipline their children?

Bet those are some stats you nor I will EVER see?

a reply to: donnydeevil

The right to defend ones self is an inalienable right. Please spend time reading the literature on tue subject matter.....its well established.

Using our brains to make tools is human behavior. Guns are a human defense mechanism. Taki g guns is akin to declawing a cat. A violation of that animals natural right to defend and feed itself.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Greven


It was not an argument it was a statement, if you want to debate the subject try bringing facts to support your side.


The 2nd was around before I was born, it did not invalidate the right it was there because it was in the bill of rights.

When I die I hope for it to still be there, and if you want to tell me it should be curtailed/removed you should bring facts to support yourself because you should expect pushback.

You want a formal argument?

The 2nd Amendment is the right to keep and bear arms.
To exercise a right, one must be alive.
Thus, to exercise the 2nd Amendment requires one to be alive.

It didn't apply to you before you were born, nor will it apply to you after you die.

These children are concerned about guns killing them before they are even permitted to exercise that 2nd Amendment right.

Is the 2nd Amendment superior to the inherent right to live?

So you think either 2nd or death.

You equate gun ownership to 100% certain death.

You are a book burner. You want to deny rights and can only go to the extreme comparison.

I asked a question - one you don't want to answer.

You decided I thought a certain way, but you are wrong.

For example, I own guns - plural. I enjoy shooting guns and exercising my 2nd Amendment rights.

You are nonsensical.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Greven

And completely unneccesary to point out in adult conversations.

Strange that there were so many responses otherwise.

a reply to: Greven

then why do you want to ban firearms?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: xuenchen

All I am detecting from this thread, and other similar threads, is fear. Fear that your "natural order" might be coming to and end. Fear that people like you will no longer dictate how the rest of the country acts. Fear that your carefully crafted lies are finally unravelling.

Would you be concerned if censorship was on the rise?

Just curious.

Because Americans see the 2nd Amendment as a right. A Constitutionally guaranteed right.

And we have people that are trying to remove/restrict that right.


Is it only gun rights that you seem okay with destroying? How about the rights to free expression?

Would you be okay with that right being gone as well?

You first have to be alive for the 2nd Amendment to mean anything.

That's what the kids are concerned about.

Does the 2nd trump the right to live?

No, because the 2nd does not give the right to kill people outside defence. It certainly does trump the right to live if that life is trying to end yours.

Wrong application.

Your right to live trumps the right to live of someone trying to kill you.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Greven

then why do you want to ban firearms?

I don't.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Greven

then why do you want to ban firearms?

I don't.

Then fine.

You aren't a book-burner.

Easy!

originally posted by: crtrvt
It must be exhausting to be so scared of change and too stupid to understand why it's happening.

When you have to make # up about the other side, you're losing.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: donnydeevil

The right to defend ones self is an inalienable right. Please spend time reading the literature on tue subject matter.....its well established.

Using our brains to make tools is human behavior. Guns are a human defense mechanism. Taki g guns is akin to declawing a cat. A violation of that animals natural right to defend and feed itself.

You can't ask them to be informed on the topic. It puts them at a significant disadvantage.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: xuenchen

All I am detecting from this thread, and other similar threads, is fear. Fear that your "natural order" might be coming to and end. Fear that people like you will no longer dictate how the rest of the country acts. Fear that your carefully crafted lies are finally unravelling.

Would you be concerned if censorship was on the rise?

Just curious.

Because Americans see the 2nd Amendment as a right. A Constitutionally guaranteed right.

And we have people that are trying to remove/restrict that right.


Is it only gun rights that you seem okay with destroying? How about the rights to free expression?

Would you be okay with that right being gone as well?

You first have to be alive for the 2nd Amendment to mean anything.

That's what the kids are concerned about.

Does the 2nd trump the right to live?

No, because the 2nd does not give the right to kill people outside defence. It certainly does trump the right to live if that life is trying to end yours.

Wrong application.

Your right to live trumps the right to live of someone trying to kill you.

This actually illustrates exactly why we have a right to bear arms. Well done.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: crtrvt
It must be exhausting to be so scared of change and too stupid to understand why it's happening.

When you have to make # up about the other side, you're losing.

Are you saying it's not fear that drives the pro gun movement?

If you put a black and white filter on a picture of high-school students you send right-wing cultists into an array of triggering about how he's literally Hitler.

So stupid

originally posted by: RomeByFire
If you put a black and white filter on a picture of high-school students you send right-wing cultists into an array of triggering about how he's literally Hitler.

So stupid

If the jackboot fits. . . . . .

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: crtrvt
It must be exhausting to be so scared of change and too stupid to understand why it's happening.

When you have to make # up about the other side, you're losing.

Are you saying it's not fear that drives the pro gun movement?

Correct. It's no more fear that drives you to want to own a gun than it is to make you want to own a fire extinguisher, learn how to swim, or any number of other things that can prevent you from dying. It's preparedness, that's all. There are a few extreme cases but it by no means represents the majority.

Pretending gun rights advocacy is based on fear is childish nonsense. It's something gun control proponents have to make up about us to make themselves feel better. It's the same tactic as when you tell a child that is afraid of monsters in his closet that the monsters are actually afraid of him. It's not something adults should be resorting to when dealing with each other. If you want to get anywhere on this issue, you have to approach it as an adult.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Greven

And completely unneccesary to point out in adult conversations.

Strange that there were so many responses otherwise.

I cant speak for others, but i did not belueve you were asking in that context. It didnt seem to be relevant to me so i just didnt think thats what you meant.