Community >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,511
In Reply To

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: Re: OOOOOOOOOHHH , Boooyyy!
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 at 12:43:00 pm EST (Viewed 670 times)
Reply Subj: Re:A Few Things.
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 at 08:17:09 pm EST (Viewed 731 times)

just because we make murder legal doesn't mean people will do it can be justified by that same logic.>

Um, NO IT CAN'T! AT ALL! Murder is obviously illegal for a reason. Bringing guns into a bar is not the same thing, especially because the owners have a say (Or appear to.). I think that you're just being really emotional here, and that it's overriding your logic system.

why would anyone pass a law to allow guns into bars unless some people desired to bring guns into bars?>

It sounds like a stupid law, and I'm sure that those same some people lobbied a politician or something. It's still not MANDATORY, though, which means that people don't have to follow it. Again, just because people CAN, doesn't mean that people will.

So you're arguing that murder should be made legal?>

For god's sakes (This is being said by an agnostic.): WHAT are you missing here? You just jump from one point or assumption to another without any comprehension or logic to it.

Being mandatory has nothing to do with it being a bad idea.>

It's the State, not the Government, but I can't imagine it being that popular or done the majority of the time.


The same applies for guns.

So any time anyone can use something responsibly, then it shouldn't be made illegal?>

If it's a LEGAL product, yes.

Yet you agreed that machine guns shouldn't be legal. Why not?>

Because those are Military weapons.

You agreed nuclear weapons shouldn't be legal? Why not? How about grenades? Rocket launchers? >

All stupid comparisons, none of them are or were ever legal (Or even AVAILABLE to.) to the general populations, nor are they a protected right.

My point is simply that if something can be abused seriously enough, it's a moot point whether others can use that something responsibly and that can't be a reason to justify making something legal.>

See above! And none of those are legal products. You used poor examples.

If you buy a gun for protection, then you should have training. What would be the point of buying something for protection that you don't know how to use and you don't know how to keep yourself safe from?>

As a safety precaution and as a deterrent. Besides, it's not too hard to fire a gun, I would imagine.

Are you retarded?>

Given that YOU were the one who thought that my saying that if bars allow patrons with guns in them because it's legal that most people won't do it equates to you thinking that I'm saying that murder should be legal, I think that you're being totally hypocritical even asking that question.

Police officers get training!>

But there are still cops who misuse their guns and use them for criminal purposes. And you wouldn't argue that cops should be prevented from getting guns because of this.

Of course it CAN be made mandatory>

How are they going to enforce this?

Other countries have made it mandatory.>

Let's just stick to this country for now, shall we?

They are not so different that training wouldn't make one a more responsible gun owner.>

Yet you called me retarded for arguing otherwise earlier.

Another non sequitur that's completely irrelevant to the point I was making.>

Not at all (Okay, maybe the last one was.). In fact, a number of cops and police chiefs have come out AGAINST gun control, and one of the reasons is that they say that cops can't be everywhere and do everything.

You obviously have no idea how these things work.>

Sure, I don't.

That's unproven.>

You're saying that it's unproven that POVERTY and crime and drugs go hand-in-hand together, or that poverty is a cause of crime? Are you seriously that out-of-touch with how the prison system works? Or do you not know that the economy impacts crime?

So you don't think there are things that are so dangerous that they should be outlawed>

Sure, if there dangerous to OTHER people. Most addicts, etc, are only dangerous to themselves.

People can become addicted to heroine after only a few tries and people can overdose on heroine on their first try.>

I am studying to be a Substance Abuse counselor. There are ALL kinds of addictions out there, and while heroin is definitely bad, you still can't put people in prison just for being addicted to it (And thus making them criminals just for being addicted.). And trust me, prescription drugs and Opiates are waaaaaaay more addictive than heroin is.

You were trying to make suicide less egregious by citing euthanasia.>

No. I was saying that suicide is not wrong in those cases. You were the one who brought up the right-to-die.

Wrong. Less than 1% of intentional shootings are in self-defense:>

I think that you need to understand how self-defense is classified, recorded and reported.

It doesn't have to stop them altogether. If stricter gun laws reduced their number, that is something important right there.>

It might lessen a few gun deaths, it still won't stop mass shootings or killings or criminals from getting guns.