Page 167 of 182 FirstFirst ... 67117157165166167168169177 ... LastLast
Results 1,661 to 1,670 of 1817

Thread: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

  1. #1661
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:42 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,076

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I enjoy this post because it was the cinema's policy not to allow patrons to defend themselves.

    Where was the crimina's Type-1 Federal Firearms License to own, posses, carry and use explosives and destructive devices?
    Your comments had nothing at all to do with mine that you used to precede yours.

    Aren't you on record as saying that such restrictions mean nothing to you anyways and you would have violated the rights of the theater owner and brought your gun in regardless of the restrictions?

    1650
    I would have carried into this cinema despite the policy.
    So much for respect of others rights.
    Last edited by haymarket; 07-23-12 at 03:38 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  2. #1662
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    So you believe that rights are granted by the government?
    Nope, but philosophers and the founders were pretty clear on that. If one wants to get into the argument that other rights led to the foundation of universal sufferage that's perfectly fine for another topic, but representation was always considered something for people with something invested in the game. IOW something to lose.




    And voter ID's won't stop voter fraud. It'll stop a mythical problem rather than a real one.
    Voter ID laws won't stop all types of fraud, but it can get rid of some of the identification based fraud. It won't fix machine tampering, buying votes, busing, etc. but it could prevent Mr. Snuggles from casting a vote.




    So the only thing that matter is if it happens to you?!?!!?
    Not my point, I was admittedly being a bit of a smartass for rhetorical purposes. What I'm saying is that a fundamental right to be armed has less of a downside and a shorter scope than that of the created right of voting. Not saying that voting should be restricted for most purposes mind you, but at least be who you're supposed to be, prove it, and have some simple understanding of who you're voting for rather than pushing a letter next to a name.





    It's still a democracy, just a representative one. As such, it is still a government of the idiots, by the idiots, for the idiots.
    We vote for that representation yes, but structurally we do not follow the democracy model.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  3. #1663
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:42 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,076

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    How many times and in how many different places is the right to keep and bear arms discussed in the US Constitution?

    How many times and in how many different places is the right to vote discussed in the US Constitution?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  4. #1664
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    So much for respect of others rights.
    It's true, I have absolutely no respect for private entities who are subject to Public Accommodation laws which try to disarm me. I have always and will continue to carry within privately owned locations where they don't want me to, because just occasionally some nut job thinks he's the Joker and shoots up the place.

    And yes I have been 'caught' before. They tell me of their rule, I apologize and claim I didn't see the sign, and I leave. No big deal. I'm pretty good at carrying concealed so this hasn't happened for a while.

  5. #1665
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Nope, but philosophers and the founders were pretty clear on that. If one wants to get into the argument that other rights led to the foundation of universal sufferage that's perfectly fine for another topic, but representation was always considered something for people with something invested in the game. IOW something to lose.
    The only part that has any bearing on our discussion has been put in bold. The fact that rights were infringed upon in the past doesn't mean they weren't rights. History does not provide any argument that allows for voter IDs today, when we recognize voting as a right and have alleviated the infringements upon that right that were supported by the foudners.

    If you agree that the government does not grant rights, then the right to vote has existed since the coutnry was founded, regardless of the founders' ability to recognize it or not. Their infringment of that right does not provide a valid argument to support our infringement of it.



    Voter ID laws won't stop all types of fraud, but it can get rid of some of the identification based fraud.
    The identification-based fraud is pretty much the mythical problem I speak of. It's so minimal as to be practically mythical.

    It won't fix machine tampering, buying votes, busing, etc. but it could prevent Mr. Snuggles from casting a vote.
    that's what I said. It won't stop the real problem, but it does address the mythical one.




    Not my point, I was admittedly being a bit of a smartass for rhetorical purposes.
    I know. And I responded in kind.

    What I'm saying is that a fundamental right to be armed has less of a downside and a shorter scope than that of the created right of voting.
    Ah, so I take it you can use a logically valid and non-hypocritical argument justify your choice to designate the rights you wish to infringe as "created" ones, while designating those that you do not want infringed as "fundamental".

    Hint: Citing the founding father's chocie to infringe upon voting rights =/= logically valid.

    Not saying that voting should be restricted for most purposes mind you, but at least be who you're supposed to be, prove it, and have some simple understanding of who you're voting for rather than pushing a letter next to a name.
    Why? Because you said so?





    We vote for that representation yes, but structurally we do not follow the democracy model.
    It's a democracy, it's just not a pure democracy. It's a representative democracy. It still follows the most basic democratic model of one citizen, one vote. that model is one that assures that the elections are decided by idiots.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  6. #1666
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    The only part that has any bearing on our discussion has been put in bold. The fact that rights were infringed upon in the past doesn't mean they weren't rights. History does not provide any argument that allows for voter IDs today, when we recognize voting as a right and have alleviated the infringements upon that right that were supported by the foudners.

    If you agree that the government does not grant rights, then the right to vote has existed since the coutnry was founded, regardless of the founders' ability to recognize it or not. Their infringment of that right does not provide a valid argument to support our infringement of it.
    I have to present ID to buy a gun, that's the second codified right. Voting was considered a priveledge under law until the 1920s. I have a right to assemble but have to present an ID to enter an adult establishment, and either way if I falsify information I've committed a crime. Now, if you wanted to argue that the right to redress if grievances, right to assemble, right to pursuit of happiness or freedom of expression all pave the way for voting to be assumed a right by all means we can discuss it further. Realistically though voting was codified later as a right than all others. The second doesn't actually do any more than reinforce the right to keep and bear BTW, it exists regardless but the vote was restricted. What I'm getting at is that it is fine to support the second AND voter ID laws. I have to maintain my rights, even those specifically stated in the U.S.C. so I don't feel for anyone who doesn't follow due dilligence in maintaining theirs.




    The identification-based fraud is pretty much the mythical problem I speak of. It's so minimal as to be practically mythical.
    It's not mythical at all.



    that's what I said. It won't stop the real problem, but it does address the mythical one.
    It's not mythical, they had people crossing the Wisconsin borders just this year to vote out of district against Scott Walker.






    I know. And I responded in kind.
    Fair enough.


    Ah, so I take it you can use a logically valid and non-hypocritical argument justify your choice to designate the rights you wish to infringe as "created" ones, while designating those that you do not want infringed as "fundamental".

    Hint: Citing the founding father's chocie to infringe upon voting rights =/= logically valid.
    Actually Tuck, I'm getting at the nature of the rights. Voting rights had to be created even though they could have been assumed to exist based upon other principles. Like I said, if enough people vote for an idiot though we all suffer, not just people who happen to be in the wrong place when misuse happens. And, the less stringently we fight stupid votes and fraud the more of it will exist. BTW, gun control is something that depends upon prior restraint, or the assumption that the tool itself needs to be removed. Voter ID laws simply say "prove you are Mr. Calvin B. Johnson, esquire".


    Why? Because you said so?
    Sure, why not. Do you really think stupid and uninformed people should just vote party line and cancel you out?







    It's a democracy, it's just not a pure democracy. It's a representative democracy. It still follows the most basic democratic model of one citizen, one vote. that model is one that assures that the elections are decided by idiots.
    The only part that resembles democracy is the actual election. After that the only voice you have is the person you elect.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  7. #1667
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:42 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,076

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    It's true, I have absolutely no respect for private entities who are subject to Public Accommodation laws which try to disarm me. I have always and will continue to carry within privately owned locations where they don't want me to, because just occasionally some nut job thinks he's the Joker and shoots up the place.

    And yes I have been 'caught' before. They tell me of their rule, I apologize and claim I didn't see the sign, and I leave. No big deal. I'm pretty good at carrying concealed so this hasn't happened for a while.
    And for all these years I have been told that it is the left that does not respect private property rights.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #1668
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,191

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Hmmm, how many guns did Timothy McVeigh and the unabomber use? I don't seem to recall.
    They weren't muslims either. So they fly under a lot of people's "terrorism radar."


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  9. #1669
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,191

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    It's true, I have absolutely no respect for private entities who are subject to Public Accommodation laws which try to disarm me. I have always and will continue to carry within privately owned locations where they don't want me to, because just occasionally some nut job thinks he's the Joker and shoots up the place.

    And yes I have been 'caught' before. They tell me of their rule, I apologize and claim I didn't see the sign, and I leave. No big deal. I'm pretty good at carrying concealed so this hasn't happened for a while.
    I think that private property should be able to ban whatever they want to. Including guns.

    It wouldn't have made a difference here, but if it's your property, you should be able to ban guns, cigarettes...hell, red t-shirts. I know there's a ban in my house against anything with a Miami Dolphins logo on it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  10. #1670
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,445

    Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    I know there's a ban in my house against anything with a Miami Dolphins logo on it.
    How can anyone hate the Phins? It's been so long since we won anything important, well... I didn't think anyone who suffered at the hands of the phins could still be alive. Beside, Marino gimped around for like 8 years as a totally ineffective grampa-with-a-bad-hip quarterback. That was a HORRIBLE curse. We've suffered a lot. And we suck. We have sucked for years and years and years. I don't think even Jets fans have a right to hate us at this point. Heck, I don't think the Patriots can even see us anymore, let alone hate us. What's your problem?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •