Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 22 Feb 2023, 9:23 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:23 am

It's **** like this.

You've expressed your point.

You haven't "made" it.

That only happens if you can defend the process that got you there.

Point number 1 is supported below. 

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws ... tion-acts/

Point number 2 has already been supported.  

Balls in your court. 
 

ConsRule » 22 Feb 2023, 9:27 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:27 am

According to the 2nd, it would be an infringement.  However, one can refuse to sell to a seven year old because of contract law.

Let's see if you can figure out why.

the point being.... as you and ducky are working so hard to avoid:  the right is fine with lots of infringements on the people's right to bear arms.... just as long as someone from the right proposes is.

Any gun regulation proposals from the right are common sense, but any proposals from the left are GUN GRABBING.

Who's the **** fear monger here?

FJB » 22 Feb 2023, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:26 am

move on dickhead, we know you are all for taking our guns.

run away waving your white flag... I blew holes in your stupid argument.
 

Huey » 22 Feb 2023, 9:28 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:28 am

Point number 1 is supported below. 

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws ... tion-acts/

Point number 2 has already been supported.  

Balls in your court.

This is how **** stupid you are.

Facts are what you use to support an argument. I don't need to spend a second on them if your argument is nonsense.

And your arguments are always nonsense.

maineman » 22 Feb 2023, 9:32 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:32 am

run away waving your white flag... I blew holes in your stupid argument.

@FJB  is probably a pregnant nun sleeping on her mom's couch..

maineman » 22 Feb 2023, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:31 am

the point being.... as you and ducky are working so hard to avoid:  the right is fine with lots of infringements on the people's right to bear arms.... just as long as someone from the right proposes is.

Any gun regulation proposals from the right are common sense, but any proposals from the left are GUN GRABBING.

Who's the **** fear monger here?

Well, for some.  Banning a semi automatic because it looks military is not common sense.  You get the same function from multiple traditional looking rifles.  Next most "ban" legislature contains grandfather laws meaning if you own it you keep it.

Common sense laws would be UBCs for all firearm transfers.

Training for first time buyers in safety, laws and use.

But that won't address those illegally obtain their firearms. 

 

maineman » 22 Feb 2023, 8:06 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 8:06 am

why do you insist on putting words in my mouth, you ignorant ****?

but you putting inaccurate ideas in eveyone else's head as undeniable truth, is ok?
Oh, in real time one puts words into eyes reading or ears listening, not the oral cavity your vocabulary emerges leading or following a conversation with/by others.

Blackvegetable » 22 Feb 2023, 9:34 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:34 am

This is how **** stupid you are.

Facts are what you use to support an argument. I don't need to spend a second on them if your argument is nonsense.

And your arguments are always nonsense.

I accept your surrender.  You can chose your own opinions.  You don't get to chose what are facts and what aren't.

You lose.  My points stand and are supported.  David Hogg is wrong, as you are for supporting his words. 

Huey » 22 Feb 2023, 9:39 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:39 am

I accept your surrender.  You can chose your own opinions.  You don't get to chose what are facts and what aren't.

You lose.  My points stand and are supported.  David Hogg is wrong, as you are for supporting his words.

Tiny,

Hogg and I are in agreement with the late former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

You can't even explain your incoherent "case".


 

Blackvegetable » 22 Feb 2023, 9:43 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:43 am

Tiny,

Hogg and I are in agreement with the late former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

You can't even explain your incoherent "case".

Enough.  Go **** someone else's thread up with your nonsense. 

We are done Kydex 67.  You have brought nothing to table.  I have explained and supported it.  

Huey » 22 Feb 2023, 9:37 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:37 am

Well, for some.  Banning a semi automatic because it looks military is not common sense.  You get the same function from multiple traditional looking rifles.  Next most "ban" legislature contains grandfather laws meaning if you own it you keep it.

Common sense laws would be UBCs for all firearm transfers.

Training for first time buyers in safety, laws and use.

But that won't address those illegally obtain their firearms.

Banning a semi automatic because it looks military is not common sense

No one has suggested it.

They should not be distributed for civilian use as the sole purpose of their development was for combat.

As unambiguously demonstrated.

maineman » 22 Feb 2023, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:31 am

the point being.... as you and ducky are working so hard to avoid:  the right is fine with lots of infringements on the people's right to bear arms.... just as long as someone from the right proposes is.

Any gun regulation proposals from the right are common sense, but any proposals from the left are GUN GRABBING.

Who's the **** fear monger here?

I'm not trying to avoid anything.  You asked a question, and I answered it.  A few things you should know about me; I do not now, nor have I ever, owned a gun.  I believe, based on overwhelming evidence, restrictions on gun ownership do nothing to stop gun violence and are a waste of resources. I understand I am not the final authority on this subject and have to accept that legislatures (at all levels) have enacted restrictive laws.  I do believe those laws should be, at a minimum, place under intense scrutiny if not overturned.

 

Huey » 22 Feb 2023, 9:44 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:44 am

Enough.  Go **** someone else's thread up with your nonsense. 

We are done Kydex 67.  You have brought nothing to table.  I have explained and supported it.

Except the concurrence of a late former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

You've spewed some ******* you've been fed.
 

ConsRule » 22 Feb 2023, 9:46 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:46 am

I'm not trying to avoid anything.  You asked a question, and I answered it.  A few things you should know about me; I do not now, nor have I ever, owned a gun.  I believe, based on overwhelming evidence, restrictions on gun ownership do nothing to stop gun violence and are a waste of resources. I understand I am not the final authority on this subject and have to accept that legislatures (at all levels) have enacted restrictive laws.  I do believe those laws should be, at a minimum, place under intense scrutiny if not overturned.

I believe, based on overwhelming evidence, restrictions on gun ownership do nothing to stop gun violence and are a waste of resources

link?

Blackvegetable » 22 Feb 2023, 9:48 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:48 am

link?

The link is virtually every newscast and a shooting event.  Has gun violence decreased?

ConsRule » 22 Feb 2023, 9:50 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:50 am

The link is virtually every newscast and a shooting event.  Has gun violence decreased?

This is what you call "reasoning"?

Huey » 22 Feb 2023, 9:37 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:37 am

Well, for some.  Banning a semi automatic because it looks military is not common sense.  You get the same function from multiple traditional looking rifles.  Next most "ban" legislature contains grandfather laws meaning if you own it you keep it.

Common sense laws would be UBCs for all firearm transfers.

Training for first time buyers in safety, laws and use.

But that won't address those illegally obtain their firearms.

I would prefer to ban high capacity magazines rather than the firearms themselves.

I ager with all of your common sense law and, even though those laws would not stop the problem, they may stem the bloodbath.
 

maineman » 22 Feb 2023, 9:32 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:32 am

run away waving your white flag... I blew holes in your stupid argument.

you and your strawman arguments

Blackvegetable » 22 Feb 2023, 9:52 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:52 am

This is what you call "reasoning"?

Maybe you should learn to read and comprehend.  I said "I believe, based on overwhelming evidence,..."  I was not a statement of fact...it is my stated belief.  You not having the ability, or intelligence, to comprehend that is a you problem, not a me problem.
 

FJB » 22 Feb 2023, 9:57 am » wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2023, 9:57 am

you and your strawman arguments

nonsense.  You claim that I am being a fear monger when I have NEVER said anything about grabbing anyone's guns and YOU have inaccurately tried to ascribe that position to me.  

Face it... you are all for sensible infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear Arms... but only those infringements that YOUR tribe approves of.