• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Upstate New York Shooting Update [W:90; 131]

j-mac said:
I am just a simple guy....It is an observation that any rational person can clearly see....demo's talk a lot of ****, but in the end, they just want the plantation to remain as it is.
Click to expand...
Are YOU black? If so, why in the world would you want to make a reference to anyone being held on a plantation?

As a conervative don't you believe everyone should make their own decisions in life, and those decisons will affect who and what they are?

Nobody is keeping anybody on a literal plantation. In my mind black conservatives are being kept on an emotional plantation with this perpetuation of racial divide. Get over it already. You are on the emotional plantation when you can't.
 
Black Manta said:
Not really. It would be ignorant white folks that somehow think blacks cannot or will not be able to compete on a level playing field. So instead of getting out of the way and letting us succeed or fail on our own, they offer racist programs that for years have eroded our morals and family structure to the point where it no longer exists in some cases. Teaching us to depend on the government hand out rather than ourselves. Teaching us that personal responsibility is now a bad word because it is always someone else's fault.

Liberalism? Please. More like dumb asses who think they are doing good but instead only hurt.
Click to expand...
They may try, but you do not have to fall for that trap.
See what I just wrote about being on an emotional plantation. NOBODY is holding you back. Stop making excuses.
 
Last edited:
66gardeners said:
If it had been your family member(s) gunned own with AR-15's, would you think again about limiting their access?
Click to expand...




Nope.

Someone I loved was shot dead with a .44 magnum revolver. I didn't respond by calling for a ban on 44's.... I held the man who pulled the trigger responsible.
 
66gardeners said:
If it had been your family member(s) gunned own with AR-15's, would you think again about limiting their access?
Click to expand...

If your relatives had been killed by an arsonist would you push to limit access to gasoline, matches, lighters and gas cans? If your realtives had been killed by a baseball bat would you demand that we limit access to them? If your relatives had been killed by a drunk driver would you wish to further limit access to cars and/or booze?
 
head of joaquin said:
Because it's mostly an NRA fiction.

In fictional NRA America criminals (NRA code for minorities) are breaking down doors and invading homes every hour. Pure rubbish of course, but that's what gunlovers trade in
Click to expand...


This is post #3. Nothing racist there. Get off the plantation already and out of the 47% who can't take responsibility.
 
Moderator's Warning:
That is quite enough, indeed way too much, of this "Who is REALLY black?" crap. It stops now.




5thElemtPolice.jpg
 
j-mac said:
I am not...I am a conservative...educate yourself as to the differences.
Click to expand...
We get "educated" on conservatism here every day. We KNOW one when we see one. They support guns for everybody, no questions asked.
 
66gardeners said:
If it had been your family member(s) gunned own with AR-15's, would you think again about limiting their access?
Click to expand...

No....If something like that had happened it obviously would have been something mentally wrong...Not the weapons fault, nor would it be the fault of anyone else that owns, or wants to own one.
 
Black Manta said:
So in other words you know you have been called on your false statements and bull****. I think the thing that makes this really funny is the "sour grapes" is coming from the guy that has a target as his picture, LMAO!

I mean really? Sour grapes? That is all you have? HEHEHEHEHE!
Click to expand...
I think LA's grapes are sweet.
 
66gardeners said:
We get "educated" on conservatism here every day. We KNOW one when we see one. They support guns for everybody, no questions asked.
Click to expand...


False.

Most conservatives favor some limit by age. Most conservatives favor not allowing felons to purchase. Most conservatives do not want certifiable loonies or known criminals getting guns legally.

The dispute tends to come about when Certain Parties propose laws that will accomplish none of these things but merely impede the law abiding.
 
j-mac said:
Plenty, but I don't feel the need to justify my political beliefs to you.
Click to expand...


So you are on a website called debate politics and you say you don't need to justify your beliefs. Your beliefs (or anyone else's for that matter) mean nothing if you can not justify them. Think about it.
 
j-mac said:
No....If something like that had happened it obviously would have been something mentally wrong...Not the weapons fault, nor would it be the fault of anyone else that owns, or wants to own one.
Click to expand...


Do you think we should all have access to chemical weapons? How about nuclear weapons. Where do you draw the line, EXACTLY?
 
j-mac said:
That is just plainly a lie.
Click to expand...
In what regard, Charlie?

At least Goshin explained himself.

If what Goshin says is true, however, can he explain why do conservatives put up a smoke screen and never have a rational discussion about what to do about gun control, healthcare, immigration, or any number of issues facing this country?
He says proposals will never accomplish any of the things they strive to accomplish? How does he know that? How does anyone know that? They DON'T!
 
Last edited:
66gardeners said:
Do you think we should all have access to chemical weapons? How about nuclear weapons. Where do you draw the line, EXACTLY?
Click to expand...


Don't be ridiculous. That old canard is as lame and tired as anything.


The standard for restricting enumerated Constitutional rights is Strict Scrutiny, which is:

The restriction must be necessary; not simply preferred, but absolutely essential to the maintenance of civil society.
The restriction must be narrowly construed.
The restriction must be the least restrictive means possible of achieving the necessary goal.


Restricting WMD obviously falls under this heading. Restricting common arms just as obviously does not.
 
66gardeners said:
Do you think we should all have access to chemical weapons? How about nuclear weapons. Where do you draw the line, EXACTLY?
Click to expand...

Yeah, show me the conservative politician running on the "Nukes for all" platform....:lamo Don't be silly.

In what regard, Charlie?
Click to expand...

You said: "They support guns for everybody, no questions asked."

That is a lie.
 
Goshin said:
Don't be ridiculous. That old canard is as lame and tired as anything.


The standard for restricting enumerated Constitutional rights is Strict Scrutiny, which is:

The restriction must be necessary; not simply preferred, but absolutely essential to the maintenance of civil society.
The restriction must be narrowly construed.
The restriction must be the least restrictive means possible of achieving the necessary goal.


Restricting WMD obviously falls under this heading. Restricting common arms just as obviously does not.
Click to expand...
Well with the definition of it being only "necessary" just who gets to decide something as arbitrary as necessary. That is absurd.

How about "it is ncessary that my child not get slaughtered with his entire class while I think he is safe in school". That - to me - is necessary and not merely a preference.
 
66gardeners said:
Well with the definition of it being only "necessary" just who gets to decide something as arbitrary as necessary. That is absurd.

How about "it is ncessary that my child not get slaughtered with his entire class while I think he is safe in school". That - to me - is necessary!
Click to expand...


The standard was established by the Surpreme Court. Argue it with them if you wish.

The point is society could not function with every Joe owning nukes or weaponized anthrax. It would collapse.

Obviously that is not the case with common weapons.

And thinking that banning law abiding persons from owning certain types of weapons will prevent mass slaughters is obviously wrong. The biggest mass murder in US history excluding 9-11 was carried out using a fertilizer bomb. The biggest school massacre was carried out using a bomb as well, in 1927. Bombs and bomb-making materials are already restricted btw.
 
66gardeners said:
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. Do you honestly think republicans care about the inner cities at all? The inner cities need community organizers. Oh wait...
Click to expand...

Ummm... What do Republicans have to do with anything? Please point out where I mentioned Republicans or Democrats etc. I didn't. Either answer my question and stop with the red herrings, or we can move on.
 
Goshin said:
Don't be ridiculous. That old canard is as lame and tired as anything.


The standard for restricting enumerated Constitutional rights is Strict Scrutiny, which is:

The restriction must be necessary; not simply preferred, but absolutely essential to the maintenance of civil society.
The restriction must be narrowly construed.
The restriction must be the least restrictive means possible of achieving the necessary goal.


Restricting WMD obviously falls under this heading. Restricting common arms just as obviously does not.
Click to expand...
If you do not restrict something, it has the potential to become common. How about private armored tanks roaming the countryside.
 
Black Manta said:
Ummm... What do Republicans have to do with anything? Please point out where I mentioned Republicans or Democrats etc. I didn't. Either answer my question and stop with the red herrings, or we can move on.
Click to expand...
Move on black manta. We are tired of being baited.
 
Ughhh why dont you report on how many shootings their are in lower new york or trenton one guy kills someone in upper new york you dedicate a thread to it . Some many gun realated deaths but most are either sucide or gang realated.
 
66gardeners said:
If you do not restrict something, it has the potential to become common. How about private armored tanks roaming the countryside.
Click to expand...


Virtually no one is seriously advocting that. Stop resorting to ridiculous examples; we're talking about common arms such a semi-auto rifles.
 
66gardeners said:
His statement was not the topic of this thread. The shooting in upstate NY was.

If you are so adamant about LA answering YOUR question, how about answering the one I had asked here repeatedly about why black conservatives keeping calling all liberals racists? They even go so far as to say the white man is being held down by liberals. It is preposterous.
Click to expand...

Because he made a racist statement and got called on it. As did you.

The rest is crap you were spouting that was completely irrelevant and made up for the most part. So nothing to respond to.
 
66gardeners said:
Move on black manta. We are tired of being baited.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
I will do the moderating here, thank you. Cease with the one-liner pokes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom