Gun discussion - Page 13 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Sports, Hobbies and all things unrelated to Politics.

Moderator: PoFo The Lounge Mods

By Hindsite
#15010879
Patrickov wrote:Accusing something as a lie is a statement that requires proof, not opinion, which doesn't.

Where is the proof that it is not a lie?
User avatar
By Godstud
#15010895
That's up to you to prove. So far, you haven't done a goddamned thing, except to prove that you don't actually have an argument.

Pretending that a policy stops crime... FULL STOP, is quite ridiculous. You should know that Trump putting in a single policy doesn't stop gun trafficking.

Also, a single operation 9 years ago, involving 2,000 guns isn't going to affect a smuggling operation that send hundreds of thousands of guns South to Latin American, one iota.
User avatar
By annatar1914
#15010904
Godstud wrote:That's up to you to prove. So far, you haven't done a goddamned thing, except to prove that you don't actually have an argument.

Pretending that a policy stops crime... FULL STOP, is quite ridiculous. You should know that Trump putting in a single policy doesn't stop gun trafficking.

Also, a single operation 9 years ago, involving 2,000 guns isn't going to affect a smuggling operation that send hundreds of thousands of guns South to Latin American, one iota.


Thing is, best option for Hindsite and those of his ilk to do is make a sensible ''firebreak'' against gun-grabbers and insist that gun ownership be simply regulated and responsible-who dislikes having responsible people being the ones with legal guns?

If they want to be Anarchists then let them be Anarchist in everything, not just with 'everybody who wants a gun having one'.

And I'm saying this as someone who wants a lot of guns in the hands of ordinary citizens. But I look at it like automobile ownership; we ask for some minimal safety classes and testing for automobiles, why not at least the same for tools not just dangerous like cars are, but tools specifically designed to inflict loss of limb, injury, or even death as a result of use.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15010906
NRA, and others, have fought against insurance for guns, because they don't want a gun registry, because then they'd have even MORE fear of having their guns taken away. :knife:

Testing for cars, and not for guns. Pure gun-nut logic. :lol:

Your average car owner has more training than the guy with a gun. You cannot conceal carry a car. :D
User avatar
By annatar1914
#15010920
Godstud wrote:NRA, and others, have fought against insurance for guns, because they don't want a gun registry, because then they'd have even MORE fear of having their guns taken away. :knife:

Testing for cars, and not for guns. Pure gun-nut logic. :lol:

Your average car owner has more training than the guy with a gun. You cannot conceal carry a car. :D


The right to self defense is self evident, as long as the force used is proportionate to the threat. And the right of the people to overthrow a gang of criminals and usurpers who have taken over the functions of the State for their own gain should be self evident to even Statists. So, I'm not talking about ''grabbing people's weapons'', but asking for a level of sobriety and intelligence and organization involved in the responsibility for possessing a weapon.

On the other hand, there really is an agenda on the part of some to truly confiscate weapons from citizens so as to render them dependent and compliant (and pliable) sheep or cattle. Usually, those curiously also happen to be the criminal and usurping sort the right to bear arms is set up to overthrow.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15010926
annatar1914 wrote:So, I'm not talking about ''grabbing people's weapons'', but asking for a level of sobriety and intelligence and organization involved in the responsibility for possessing a weapon.
QFT. This is what most people want. responsible gun ownership.

The "Well trained militia" part of the 2nd Amendment seems to imply training.

annatar1914 wrote:On the other hand, there really is an agenda on the part of some to truly confiscate weapons from citizens so as to render them dependent and compliant (and pliable) sheep or cattle. Usually, those curiously also happen to be the criminal and usurping sort the right to bear arms is set up to overthrow.
:lol: This is Conspiracy Theory nonsense.

No one is trying to confiscate all the weapons as to render them dependent and compliant, except for the most fanatical anti-gun people. :roll: This Is USA we're talking about, not North Korea. This is fear-mongering of the highest order, and the NRA likes to propagate this fear.

Pretending that the right to bear arms would enable your to overthrow the USA, is sheer fantasy.
User avatar
By annatar1914
#15010940
@Godstud ;

QFT. This is what most people want. responsible gun ownership.


Yes, and note what you've said below here about 'conspiracy theory', because it's important.

The "Well trained militia" part of the 2nd Amendment seems to imply training.


Yes, and ''training'' for what, pray tell? More than personal self-defense, but collective self-defense also.

:lol: This is Conspiracy Theory nonsense.

No one is trying to confiscate all the weapons as to render them dependent and compliant, except for the most fanatical anti-gun people. :roll: This Is USA we're talking about, not North Korea. This is fear-mongering of the highest order, and the NRA likes to propagate this fear.


I know what the NRA likes to propagate and why, yes, but as you admit, there are fanatical anti-gun people, so it's important to state that one can go too far in limitations on personal/militia weaponry

Pretending that the right to bear arms would enable your to overthrow the USA, is sheer fantasy.


The Militia exists to protect the American Revolution, and restore the American Revolution should it ever be overthrown. If people concerned about guns and so-called ''Second Amendment'' advocates have both forgotten that, is really besides the point.

So what then is the ''Militia''? It is in fact the People's Army, conscripted, trained, and politically educated in the principles of the American Revolution. So there is no license for gun owners to go beyond collective or self defense, but there remains an obligation to possess vigilant collective and personal oversight of the government in order to maintain public sovereignty.
By Hindsite
#15010950
Godstud wrote:No one is trying to confiscate all the weapons as to render them dependent and compliant, except for the most fanatical anti-gun people.

In the USA, those fanatical anti-gun people are Democrats.
User avatar
By annatar1914
#15010954
Hindsite wrote:In the USA, those fanatical anti-gun people are Democrats.


That's not entirely true either. I have a lot of Democrat friends who like having their guns. They're working class people, pro-life/pro-traditional family, etc... But they hate senseless murders by lunatics with access to guns.

Some people aren't allowed to drive or operate heavy machinery. Some people aren't allowed to engage in a certain trade or skill without training, classes, certification to show that they have some kind of responsible competence at what they're doing.

What's wrong with that, people not allowed to have guns unless they show some safety and training that was intended by our founding fathers?
User avatar
By Godstud
#15010960
@Hindsite I'll have you know that most of my "liberal" and "Democrat" friend own guns and are very responsible with them. They want responsible gun controls. They don't want banning of all guns. That's a ludicrous proposition and you know that would never happen in the USA, too.

My Liberal Canadian's gun collection:
Image

So, no. We don't want gun bans, but responsible gun ownership, background check, and careful sales to people who aren't mentally ill, or criminal.
User avatar
By annatar1914
#15010961
Godstud wrote:@Hindsite I'll have you know that most of my "liberal" and "Democrat" friend own guns and are very responsible with them. They want responsible gun controls. They don't want banning of all guns. That's a ludicrous proposition and you know that would never happen in the USA, too.

My Liberal Canadian's gun collection:
Image

So, no. We don't want gun bans, but responsible gun ownership, background check, and careful sales to people who aren't mentally ill, or criminal.



And as you know, GS, it wasn't that long ago that we had that debate on PoFo where it was conclusively shown that even the radical extreme Communist Left has every interest in the world in wanting people to have guns in their possession, so folks like Hindsite can't come back and say that Communists and Socialists want all the weapons to be confiscated. That would be an Elite Rich shitbag position, confiscation of the people's weapons.
User avatar
By Patrickov
#15010983
Hindsite wrote:Where is the proof that it is not a lie?


Assume that your insistence that "opinions can be a lie" is true, that person's opinion can only be a lie if you know the person is not telling what he / she thinks. This can only be proven from that person's actions, which is impossible unless you know that person face-by-face and monitors his / her actions personally. Therefore, I am confident that you statement is false, which means that person is not telling a lie -- you are (not least by lying on you ability to determine whether that person's opinion is a lie).
By Hindsite
#15011135
Patrickov wrote:Assume that your insistence that "opinions can be a lie" is true, that person's opinion can only be a lie if you know the person is not telling what he / she thinks. This can only be proven from that person's actions, which is impossible unless you know that person face-by-face and monitors his / her actions personally. Therefore, I am confident that you statement is false, which means that person is not telling a lie -- you are (not least by lying on you ability to determine whether that person's opinion is a lie).

How do you know that I am not telling what I think?
User avatar
By Patrickov
#15011158
Hindsite wrote:How do you know that I am not telling what I think?


I have already told you what you were lying about so don't try to evade the topic.
By Hindsite
#15011168
Patrickov wrote:I have already told you what you were lying about so don't try to evade the topic.

How can I be lying, if it is my honest opinion?
User avatar
By Patrickov
#15011199
Hindsite wrote:How can I be lying, if it is my honest opinion?


You identify someone's opinion as a lie, the falseness of which, as I already said, is impossible to decide. Which means you deliberately made a statement you cannot justify, which, as I know, was a lie.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15011202
@Patrickov Let it rest.

@Hindsite Stop accusing people of lying. It's not an opinion, it's belligerence. People are presenting evidence that is contrary to what you believe, and that does not make it a lie. It's also extremely rude and actual against forum rules to call people "liars", or accuse them of "lying".

Present some evidence showing what you believe is actually true. Some sources might be a good start.
By BigSteve
#15011751
I have no problem with measures which will truly make us safer.

I have no problem with background checks, but they need to be completed in a reasonable amount of time.

Training? I have no problem with requiring that, but since it will be required so that a person may exercise their Constitutionally protected right, the government should provide that training, on demand, at no cost to the individual.

Registering weapons? Well, there's not a single thing about gun registration which makes anyone safer, so there's no reason to do it. I have a lot of guns, and the government has no need to know what they are or how many I have. I like it that way.

Banning certain guns? It's been shown, time and time again that such measures do nothing to curtail gun violence. Why? Because criminals couldn't give a fuck what the law is.

I also favor punishments, for crimes committed with a firearm, which border on the barbaric...
  • 1
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16

The Dokdo islands were designated as Korean terr[…]

The Next UK PM everybody...

I was told there's a debate between Bae Corbyn and[…]

Are you suggesting that it was an alliance of car[…]

Trump and Russiagate

The United States intelligence community has concl[…]