View Poll Results: Would this compromise be acceptable?

Voters
93. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. This isnít perfect, but no compromise is.

    12 12.90%
  • No. I donít mind some compromise, but this still takes away too much.

    13 13.98%
  • No. We should never compromise our gun rights.

    61 65.59%
  • No. This still gives too many gun ownership privileges.

    4 4.30%
  • I can hit a target 400 yards away with my eyes closed.

    3 3.23%
Page 56 of 71 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 705

Thread: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

  1. #551
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,419

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No. You're assertion as best I can tell is that it is reasonable for people to have large clips, that they are needed. Quit diverting to me, and try to demonstrate the need, support your assertion.
    You know it's crap that you've got him in that position to begin with. You're not debating the topic. You know well enough that it is not necessary to prove "need" in the prevention of the infringement of rights.

  2. #552
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,730

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No. You're assertion as best I can tell is that it is reasonable for people to have large clips, that they are needed. Quit diverting to me, and try to demonstrate the need, support your assertion.
    I don't need to support what I want. You have to prove that I am less entitled to them than other civilians and you have to prove that I will NEVER NEED ONE

    since our civilian police have determined that they need them I am relying on that

    and you labor under the delusion that law abiding citizens who are not cops are somehow less trustworthy than those who are

    you need to stick to determining what YOU NEED and stop pretending you have any clue what others need And rights are not about NEED. Your entire posting strategy is a sanctimonious suggestive attack on others that pretends you know more than they do

    you do not

    you do not know near as much about the use if firearms for self defense in a civilian environment than i do

    You do not know nearly as much about the laws of self defense as they apply to civilians cops and others as I do

    and I know you aren't anywhere near as skilled in shooting as I am

    so its time for you to stop pretending anything you say to me and others as to what we need has any value whatsoever

  3. #553
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    09-30-14 @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    70

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    If You REALLY Were In
    You Were Probably Only Long Enough To Get Your Picture Taken
    So Your Mommy Could Play Proud To Her Section Eight

  4. #554
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,730

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Dammitboy! View Post
    It's been demonstrated repeatedly. Only the brain dead would have trouble seeing that.

    One more time: If the police think they need them - then I need them. We face the same criminal element.
    the best these anti gun fanatics can claim is the statist worshipping rot that the cops are more valuable than you are.

  5. #555
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Dammitboy! View Post
    So how do you plan to control what criminals do? How do you know what criminals will do? How do you know how many criminals will try to break in your home?

    Wouldn't an effective strategy to be prepared for worst case scenarios? I remember my neighbors used to laugh and joke that I was a "prepper" for having 3 weeks worth of food, water, and supplies in my home - until we got hit by Katrina. Now they all have emergency supplies.
    Lived inner city most my life. Lived rural as well. Have never laced a door, never had a gun, never been mugged or robbed. And haven't had a fight since my early twenties. Of course, I do have dogs. Shepherds. Well trained. Kids love em.

    But, I'm open to you showing actual need.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #556
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,419

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by karpenter View Post
    So Your Mommy Could Play Proud To Her Section Eight
    Have you heard of 'The Basement' (Debate Politics Extras). There, you can post stuff like that. Here (main forum, "upstairs"), not so much.

  7. #557
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,730

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Yes, it is best to not get into accidents. I take those steps and not drive a tank. Again, you have the right to have a gun. You have the right to self defense. This is not the issue. Why do you need more than the job requires?
    this will be my last post to you on this subject because you have intentionally ignored what i and others have told you many times-apparently you think that asking the same silly question over and over is a substitute for a valid argument

    1) we citizens don't start fights-others do and we cannot choose who and how many may attack us

    2) our local law enforcement officers are less likely to be attacked than we are yet they have determined they need certain sized magazines to fight the same criminals (often on the cops' terms) we are in danger of being attacked by

    3) based on that it is an objective standard for us civilians to buy the same stuff our tax dollars supply our police officers to deal with the same criminals

  8. #558
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    You know it's crap that you've got him in that position to begin with. You're not debating the topic. You know well enough that it is not necessary to prove "need" in the prevention of the infringement of rights.
    Different issue. The right to regulate us well established. If he wants to go down that track, we skip defense and look at law concerning regulation. However, he liked it to his need to defend himself. I try to stay where we are, but if he wants to leave this one and switch the topic, I'm game.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #559
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,419

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Different issue... I try to stay where we are, but if he wants to leave this one and switch the topic, I'm game.
    Fair enough. I would also like to see his explanation of need.

  10. #560
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    this will be my last post to you on this subject because you have intentionally ignored what i and others have told you many times-apparently you think that asking the same silly question over and over is a substitute for a valid argument

    1) we citizens don't start fights-others do and we cannot choose who and how many may attack us

    2) our local law enforcement officers are less likely to be attacked than we are yet they have determined they need certain sized magazines to fight the same criminals (often on the cops' terms) we are in danger of being attacked by

    3) based on that it is an objective standard for us civilians to buy the same stuff our tax dollars supply our police officers to deal with the same criminals
    I haven't ignored it. I'm unconvinced by those arguments. Police are called to enter into situations, you are not.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 56 of 71 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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