|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
10-09-2017, 10:49 AM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
The First Amendment doesn't give me the right to threaten someone, nor to possess child pornography. this is correct,
no where in the 1st Amendment does is state a right to possess or do these things
Child pornography, like firearms, is a tangible thing. And its existence has been banned, in the interest of public safety (same argument I am making here). There are extremist kooks out there who claim that laws banning child pornography, are a violation of the first amendment, since that amendment doesn't specify that kiddie porn is excluded. The people who want to legalize kiddie porn, are using the same exact argument and language you are using. There is zero difference. So if your argument supports the possession of bump stocks, why doesn't it support the right to possess kiddie porn?
|
I see what you are trying to do there....I'm really concerned about you....
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 11:20 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
I see what you are trying to do there....I'm really concerned about you....
|
If you are concerned, then you don't know what I am doing, probably because I am not articulating it well.
If it's unconstitutional to impose restrictions to the second amendment for the sake of public safety, why is it considered not unconstitutional to impose restrictions to other amendments for the sake of public safety? That's all I'm asking, and neither you nor detbuch (two guys I deeply respect and agree with 95% of the time) have come close to answering that. I don't think you can, because I don't think there is a conceivable retort to that.
We can disagree about where to draw the lines, to be sure. But that's not what the pro-gun folks usually argue. They always use the same tired arguments (slight exaggeration for effect)::
I need my guns to protect against a tyrannical government (because Seal Team Six might seize my home if I didn't have a deer hunting rifle in my basement)
Banning bump stocks would not be a 100% guarantee that there would be zero gun crime in the future, therefore we shouldn't do anything, because only perfect laws are worth ratifying.
If we let the feds ban bump stocks today, we go down a slippery slope where tomorrow if I criticize Trump, I will be put into a gulag. Because today, apparently, there are zero restrictions on anything I might do, so this would be the very first time in the history of the USA that the feds have ever said "no" to me.
I feel like I'm talking to people who are trying to defend slavery. That's how hard it is for me to believe that otherwise rational and logical people, can be so...I don't know... extremist? thoughtless? Unsympathetic to the victims? I have very close friends who agree with you and detbuch, these are guys of high intelligence and very solid moral character. I just can't fathom their position on this issue.
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 11:27 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
between you and Eben the nonsense is epic
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 11:35 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,559
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
between you and Eben the nonsense is epic
|
That’s our job
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 11:44 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
If you are concerned, then you don't know what I am doing, probably because I am not articulating it well.
|
you act as there are no gun laws and no 'restrictions' currently exist
I've repeatedly agreed that bumps stocks should go away...I think you just like saying "bump stock"
thoughtless, extremist slavery/child pornography defenders...that's an all time low
I feel like I'm talking to Nancy Pelosi
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 12:06 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,559
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
you act as there are no gun laws and no 'restrictions' currently exist
I've repeatedly agreed that bumps stocks should go away...I think you just like saying "bump stock"
thoughtless, extremist slavery/child pornography defenders...that's an all time low
I feel like I'm talking to Nancy Pelosi
|
You can fantasize about Pelosi. You just can’t own one
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 12:10 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe
You can fantasize about Pelosi. You just can’t own one
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 12:18 PM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,559
|
[QUOTE=scottw;1129673] [/QUOTE
I’m in love
https://goo.gl/images/ExV5jp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 02:01 PM
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
you act as there are no gun laws and no 'restrictions' currently exist
I've repeatedly agreed that bumps stocks should go away...I think you just like saying "bump stock"
thoughtless, extremist slavery/child pornography defenders...that's an all time low
I feel like I'm talking to Nancy Pelosi
|
I feel like I'm talking to a liberal too. You are claiming I am saying things, that bear no resemblance to anything I have ever said.
"you act as there are no gun laws"
In what way am I acting as if there are no laws? Of course there are laws. In my opinion, they can be improved. In fact, I am very confident they can be improve din a way which (1) saves a few lives (but doesn't eliminate 100% of gun violence, obviously), and (2) doesn't trample on the intent of the second amendment. That's all I am saying. I'm not saying the earth is flat...
|
|
|
|
10-09-2017, 02:16 PM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
I feel like I'm talking to a liberal too. You are claiming I am saying things, that bear no resemblance to anything I have ever said.
"you act as there are no gun laws"
If it's unconstitutional to impose restrictions to the second amendment for the sake of public safety, why is it considered not unconstitutional to impose restrictions to other amendments for the sake of public safety?
In what way am I acting as if there are no laws? Of course there are laws. In my opinion, they can be improved. In fact, I am very confident they can be improve din a way which (1) saves a few lives (but doesn't eliminate 100% of gun violence, obviously), and (2) doesn't trample on the intent of the second amendment. That's all I am saying. I'm not saying the earth is flat...
|
:kewl you seem upset that I'm not a hysterical as you
I agreed with regard to bump stocks....limit the number of guns?...he had a bunch but only used "two" I believe
restrictions "to the second amendment" can not stop people from doing evil acts...just as "restrictions to the 1st"...cannot stop someone from yelling fire in a theater(talk about tired arguments)
that is why Rights come with Responsibilities...not restrictions.....restrictions are a joke to someone lacking responsibility....restrictions mainly restrict those that are already responsible
Freedom is exercising your inalienable Rights with Responsibility....I think socialism might be exercising the rights they allow you *with restrictions
you have yet to offer any "restrictions" that would have prevented the shooting in Vegas...
can you identify a few restrictions to other amendments for the sake of public safety? I'm just curious
Last edited by scottw; 10-09-2017 at 03:16 PM..
|
|
|
|
10-10-2017, 08:36 AM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
:can you identify a few restrictions to other amendments for the sake of public safety? I'm just curious
|
Really?
Freedom of speech - can't threaten someone, can't yell "fire" in a theater, can't possess or create kiddie porn.
Freedom of religion - no human sacrifices, no mutilating women's genitalia
2nd amendment - all kinds of things you can't buy
We agree that what happened is horrible, and we both hope it never happens again. we can leave it at that.
|
|
|
|
10-10-2017, 09:28 AM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Really?
Freedom of speech - can't threaten someone, can't yell "fire" in a theater, can't possess or create kiddie porn.
Freedom of religion - no human sacrifices, no mutilating women's genitalia
2nd amendment - all kinds of things you can't buy
|
really?
every example you listed speech/religion would be an infringement on rights of others which is how you lose your rights and freedom
tell me how "all kinds of things you can't buy" infringes on the rights of others?
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:15 AM.
|
| |