Guns From Vending Machines
I like to bring this up from time to time for the newbies who fall under the spell of the neanderthals here who gipe, bitch, moan, complain, find fault, insult and also claim that if you are to be a TRUE American, and TRUE believer in the US Constitution and a TRUE man then you must support having absolutely no gun laws what-so-ever.
Now this attitude of theirs has generated countless hours of arguments and debate about who is right. I merely want to post a single simple sentence about this.
If you agree with their position, that means handguns can legally be sold out of vending machines to anyone with the money.
If you think that attitude is to crazy and nobody here actually believes it (such as the yellow canary asses) then just you ask them and find out.
So, is that what everyone here wants? Let's separate the crazy people from the at least half-way sane on this matter.
Now this attitude of theirs has generated countless hours of arguments and debate about who is right. I merely want to post a single simple sentence about this.
If you agree with their position, that means handguns can legally be sold out of vending machines to anyone with the money.
If you think that attitude is to crazy and nobody here actually believes it (such as the yellow canary asses) then just you ask them and find out.
So, is that what everyone here wants? Let's separate the crazy people from the at least half-way sane on this matter.
0
-
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Regardless what entity makes the laws (federal, state, city, county) if laws cannot protect us against gun violence, then of course it would have to be true that laws cannot protect women against rape.
So, let's eliminate laws against rape and all other crimes (robbery, murder, kidnapping, etc.)
This makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.
Obviously laws against rape do not protect a woman from being raped, they exist to remove the rapist from society after the fact.
Justice is not protection, and preemptive justice is not freedom.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by Don McManusOriginally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
Regardless what entity makes the laws (federal, state, city, county) if laws cannot protect us against gun violence, then of course it would have to be true that laws cannot protect women against rape.
So, let's eliminate laws against rape and all other crimes (robbery, murder, kidnapping, etc.)
Here is yet another example of where you attempt to make a statement of "if this, then that" as fact. And again you state an assertion which is false in it's premise. This is why you CAN'T get it. You will continue down this false light of your own truth straying further from reality each and every time.
COB0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Regardless what entity makes the laws (federal, state, city, county) if laws cannot protect us against gun violence, then of course it would have to be true that laws cannot protect women against rape.
So, let's eliminate laws against rape and all other crimes (robbery, murder, kidnapping, etc.)
This makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.
Obviously laws against rape do not protect a woman from being raped, they exist to remove the rapist from society after the fact.
Justice is not protection, and preemptive justice is not freedom.
In red above. Then you agree that we might as well get rid of anti-rape laws? Since you yourself describe them as worthless?
Why would you not want to rid us of ALL worthless laws?0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Regardless what entity makes the laws (federal, state, city, county) if laws cannot protect us against gun violence, then of course it would have to be true that laws cannot protect women against rape.
So, let's eliminate laws against rape and all other crimes (robbery, murder, kidnapping, etc.)
This makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.
Obviously laws against rape do not protect a woman from being raped, they exist to remove the rapist from society after the fact.
Justice is not protection, and preemptive justice is not freedom.
In red above. Then you agree that we might as well get rid of anti-rape laws? Since you yourself describe them as worthless?
Why would you not want to rid us of ALL worthless laws?
Fox, you keep trying the same old rhetoric. Get a mind. Laws do not protect the public from predators. Laws against the person are only there to enforce governmental will on those who commit an act contrary to public policy. If you doubt this, then reflect on a restraining order when the woman holds it up as protection from the jilted boyfriend. Of course, he will stop and go away at the sight of that paper... yeah right.
Secondly, you keep trying to mix crimes against a person with public policy laws in violation of a Constitutional Right.
You still don't get it.
COB0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
ok, fox.
first off, i gotta say, i got a chuckle out of the fact that your first example, after mentioning the term "gun laws", was the "laws against rape".
the way your mind jumps from legislation governing the purchase of firearms to a crime involving the use of sex gives a glimpse at the psychology at work underneath that furry little foxtail.
[:p]
anyway....
i will admit, i'm sure that background checks, waiting periods, awb's and "hi" cap bans have probably saved a life or 2, somewhere.
i'm also positive that waiting periods, "gun free zones", restrictions on concealed carry, not allowing our soldiers to carry on base, background checks, etc etc, have cost lives.
why is it so friggin' hard for you to understand, we need to regulate idiots, not weapons.
why do murder and rape laws (sometimes) work?
because there are harsh penalties for offenders.
since you made the comparison to rape....
is there a license for sexual activity?
is there a background check before one goes into a bar to cruise for women?
does an outside party keep possession of your man parts for 10 days before they give you possession, at which time you can use them in a regulated manner?
do you need a permit to wear your schlong under your clothes?
no.
do you suggest government issued chastity belts, or some similar device, should be in place on ever individual until they pass a background check, waiting period, citizenship status check, mental health screening, before their allowed to use their privates in a responsible and adult manner?
or, like me, do you think that we should be allowed to do what we want with our own business until we violate another's rights, at which point we pay the penalty for our crimes?
seriously, dude, advocating ANY position, other than total freedom for those who can take personal responsibility for themselves and stiff penalties for those who can't, is both preposterous on it's face, and subversive and dangerous at it's core.
the idea of being able to legislate safety, morality, or responsibility, is like a cancer.
it will slowly spread to all areas of our lives, until we wither away and die leaving naught but a memory of what we once were.
regulation of firearms is the first step towards total control of the population.
for sake of our republic, please, grow up..0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
Dear God!!
Absolutely amazing to see such a display of abject ignorance and convoluted thought.
"Malum en se" as opposed to "malum prohibitum".
Google it.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
OK, Don, I will approach this from an entirely different angle.
If you, and others here, insist that having at least a minimual amount of guns laws can never do any good, then you have to say the very same thing about laws against rape, robbery, murder, tax cheating, child poronography, etc. etc. This cannot be denied.
Dear God!!
Absolutely amazing to see such a display of abject ignorance and convoluted thought.
"Malum en se" as opposed to "malum prohibitum".
Google it.
Don't forget Malum per se'0 -
Wow...just...wow. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
68 comments