Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Stripers
No you missed my original point, in that yet another mass shooting gets Trump talking momentarily about universal background checks, only to reverse course on talking to the NRA,
|
Trump is a dealmaker who goes into any discussion where differences are apparent with the assumption that the other side is honest and wants to solve the immediate problem. Anti-gunners can not be afforded such confidence. There are plenty of reforms and changes that can be done to make the background check better but they will be sacrificed on the altar of poking a stick in the eye of legal gun owners and their evil overlords, the NRA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Stripers
which prompted the usual NRA talking points by RR.
|
Those "talking points" are direct attacks on your positions and beliefs, exposing them to be deficient, unworkable and usually unconstitutional. I realize and understand why you feel compelled to dismiss and ignore my arguments but please know, your inability and/or incapability to rebut my position or defend your position speaks louder than your diversionary bleats and whines about talking points.
There's a lot to find disgusting and detestable in leftist, statist authoritarian anti-gun arguments but the worst is that you feel you don't need to defend your positions and that's OK . . . Truth is, you can't defend them; such is the flaw in positions held as emotional constructs. A position that the holder is unwilling or incapable of defending, is hardly worth any respect or consideration in the debate over public policy enactments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Stripers
So RR and others spew the usual NRA talking points, it’s an old argument, but explain to me the harm done by the background checks and closing loopholes?
|
That you hold the Constitution and liberty principles in such disdain sure is cutting edge and novel; no wonder you think my points are old. Sorry, the Constitution doesn't change like liberals think it does and yes, the arguments that oppose what you promote don't vary too much over the years . . . They don't need to. The same late 18th century arguments in opposition to the King's edicts still apply to the proposals of today's statist authoritarian left.
That you have such a short attention span, that you can't comprehend anything longer than a few short sentences, demonstrates you will never "get" what the core of the argument is. Thus, you are dismissed as a complete waste of time and energy.