• 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!

Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother[W:52]

Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

I never said that and you damn well know it because you FAILED to print any quotes from me saying it. It is simply more blatant dishonesty and fraud.

It speaks volumes about your argument that you have to resort to such tactics.

That is you're own logic being used against you Haymarket.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

When you obtain the ability to accurately predict the future, get back to me.

When you stop being in denial about the consequences of your societies firearms obsession get back to me :roll:
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

When you stop being in denial about the consequences of your societies firearms obsession get back to me :roll:
You're having a tough time staying on topic.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

We all already know that you wouldn't have a gun in your house. You're anti-gun. And you know that not having a gun in the house isn't reflective of what we are talking about. All that you did was try to evade answering a simple question honestly. Because of this there is only one possible conclusion.

You don't want to admit that you would not accept responsibility and that it would be wrong for someone to sue you for such.

Yes I believe the estate of the deceased should be sued for reckless criminal endangerment because clearly that domestic arsenal was not secure enough. Is that clear enough for you ?
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

That is you're own logic being used against you Haymarket.

The person failed to print any quotes from me showing I said what they claim I believe or said.

That involves NO USE OF LOGIC. Its all evidence or the lack of it.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Nah, I'm pretty certain of the outcome. But thanks anyway.

If you read the article exposing the failings of the tactic you advocate, you will see that such a poll tells you nothing factual.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

If you read the article exposing the failings of the tactic you advocate, you will see that such a poll tells you nothing factual.

It will provide a statistical measure based on a local population. Plenty sufficient for DP.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

It will provide a statistical measure based on a local population. Plenty sufficient for DP.

You're having a tough time staying on topic :cool:
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

It will provide a statistical measure based on a local population. Plenty sufficient for DP.

Especially when DP gun threads are mostly composed of an extremely narrow and ideologically skewed population who who absolutely no interest in any actual facts or objectivity but use these threads simply to control and promote opinion that they approve of.

No wonder you want to take a poll on what such true believers believe about their perceived enemy! :roll:
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

The continued comparison of cars and firearms is employing the fallacy of False Equivalency.

No it's not, it works very well so people had to invent reasons to avoid confronting it.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

No it's not, it works very well so people had to invent reasons to avoid confronting it.

No it works very well for gun nuts who want to avoid confronting the consequences of their bizarre fetish for the wider society. All developed nations have auto casualties (they are an unavoidable fact of modern life) but none remotely approach the US in firearms casualties. It is quite unique in that regard
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

No it's not, it works very well so people had to invent reasons to avoid confronting it.

Its the fallacy of False Equivalency. It has not at all worked well for your side and has been exposed over and over again. And it has been confronted head on right here by others.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Its the fallacy of False Equivalency. It has not at all worked well for your side and has been exposed over and over again. And it has been confronted head on right here by others.

It won't stop them from hiding behind it ad infinitum all the same. Its a bit like the old chestnut that 'guns don't kill people, people do' which makes about as much sense as saying lawnmowers don't mow lawns, people do. You get my point I hope
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

No it works very well for gun nuts who want to avoid confronting the consequences of their bizarre fetish for the wider society. All developed nations have auto casualties (they are an unavoidable fact of modern life) but none remotely approach the US in firearms casualties. It is quite unique in that regard

Are men that collect cars and women that collect women just silly fetishists too?

I am a strong supporter of the 2A and have several guns. Every single one has a specific purpose and is not some collector's item. I dont hoard extras.

And car accidents are not unavoidable...get rid of private cars. And if you want to reduce accidents, reduce the numbers of cars in private hands. Millions of adults in the US do not own cars and do just fine. If people really care about DEATHS and not tools, then they would be restricing private vehicle use to absolute necessity...people near public transportation couldnt own them or only use them in emergencies and people in rural areas would need special permits and only be able to use them for agricultural purposes or to get to public transit in town.

But people arent interested in reducing deaths, they're interested in getting rid of guns, irrationally.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

It won't stop them from hiding behind it ad infinitum all the same. Its a bit like the old chestnut that 'guns don't kill people, people do' which makes about as much sense as saying lawnmowers don't mow lawns, people do. You get my point I hope

Yes - and you are accurate. I like the lawnmowers comparison.

Here in the States, there are people who are so extreme on the far right side of the gun issue that they feel some need to characterize anyone who does not share their almost religious like obsession as "anti-gun". For example, the most conservative US President in the last 80 years was Ronald Reagan. He was a great friend of the NRA and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. But Reagan signed a law as governor and another as President which placed restrictions on guns so now he is lumped in with a category of contempt called GUN BANNERS. The idea being that there just might be one gun you do not want available but that makes you a GUN BANNER. And if somebody then jumps to the conclusion that the title means you want to ban ALL GUNS - so much the better to demonize your enemy.

This has to stop.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Are men that collect cars and women that collect women just silly fetishists too?

Some fetishes are harmless others aren't

I am a strong supporter of the 2A and have several guns. Every single one has a specific purpose and is not some collector's item. I dont hoard extras.

Specific purpose ? A guns raison d'etre is killing so how many do you need ? You only have two hands after all

And car accidents are not unavoidable...get rid of private cars. And if you want to reduce accidents, reduce the numbers of cars in private hands.

Cost benefit analysis. Cars are a huge asset to a modern society that could not exist in its current form without them. Guns are not

Millions of adults in the US do not own cars and do just fine.

I'm sure they do

But people arent interested in reducing deaths, they're interested in getting rid of guns, irrationally.

Saving 30,000 lives a year from a factor that other developed societies have managed to avoid almost entirely is certainly not irrational.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

It won't stop them from hiding behind it ad infinitum all the same. Its a bit like the old chestnut that 'guns don't kill people, people do' which makes about as much sense as saying lawnmowers don't mow lawns, people do. You get my point I hope

Do you have a lot of lawnmowers in England that are self powered, and decide what lawns they are cutting that day?

Lawnmowers don't mow lawns on their own. People operate them. Just like guns don't kill anyone on their own. People operate them.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Do you have a lot of lawnmowers in England that are self powered, and decide what lawns they are cutting that day?

Lawnmowers don't mow lawns on their own. People operate them. Just like guns don't kill anyone on their own. People operate them.

WOW!!!! Flogger called that one right on the nose!!!!!
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

WOW!!!! Flogger called that one right on the nose!!!!!

nope, his argument is extreme-he wants Americans disarmed like the Brits.. Public Safety is just a facade
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Do you have a lot of lawnmowers in England that are self powered, and decide what lawns they are cutting that day?

Lawnmowers don't mow lawns on their own. People operate them. Just like guns don't kill anyone on their own. People operate them.

Hooray for you ! You got my point :applaud
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

WOW!!!! Flogger called that one right on the nose!!!!!

It's very easy to "call that one" when it's an obvious and fatal weakness in the entire gun restriction / confiscation debate. Perhaps when 2A deniers can explain how inanimate objects are the source of evil without people, "calling that one" will become a moot point. :lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom