M14 Shooter

And that's fine with me.

Since he threw down the gauntlet, I'm sure he wont mind if I pick the issue and my side of it.

Issue:
What weapons are protected by the 2nd amendment?
My side:
I will argue that, certainly, any modern firearm you care to mention is protected by the 2nd.

The format for the debate is open for discussion.

__________________
Any time someone says there should be a prior restraint on gun ownership, ask them what they think about a person's right to talk to known al Qaeda operatives without fear of being listened in on.

niftydrifty

http://www.debatepolitics.com/privat...uidelines.html (Please Read: Private Debate Rules & Guidelines)

I hope you set it up so that only you and I can post. I noticed that you didn't read the guidelines. please do so. I don't disagree with your second amendment interpretation at all. it's a topic I'm not that bothered by or concerned with at all. now how about a topic that we both agree with, as the guidelines say. I'd really enjoy engaging you in a private debate, Shooter. I hope we can do that, with a topic upon we can both agree, as the guidelines say. propose something else, and I can as well.

__________________
"I admit it. The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." - Bill Kristol

M14 Shooter

I havent set anything up,. this was simply a post to present the challenge.

And of you dont think you can effectively argue a position counter to mine, then I guess your mad debate skills arent as mad as you thought.

niftydrifty

LOL, here's a topic. when I say I don't disagree with your interpretation of the 2nd amendment, is it evidence that I don't think I can effectively argue a position counter to yours? LOL.

I don't believe this forum is for setting up private debates. PMs are. this forum is only having private debates. but maybe Stace won't mind if we do and then deleting the thread?

I'm game for arguing about something having to with (1) how bad Bush has been in any area of policy, (2) free market vs regulation (3) the Iraq War (4) stuff having to do with religion, (5) or "media bias."

or other topics, too. those are just some ideas.

M14 Shooter

Well, then, lets debate what weapons are protected by the 2nd.

If I did something earth-shatteringly wrong here, I apologize.
I hope it doesnt result in the death of some baby seals or something.

Not interested.

Captain America

I think every crackhead should upgrade from a .32 cal to a shoulder fired missle myself. How can we accomplish that if we outlaw shoulder fired missles?

When shoulder fired missles are outlawed, only outlaws will have shoulder fired missles!

__________________
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy" until you can find a gun.

Huckabee for prez in 2012!

M14 Shooter

Most crackheads use .22s or .25s. Moving up to a .32 might be too much for them.

niftydrifty

they all are. of course, it could be argued that automatic weapons didn't exist when the amendment was written, but it does say "arms," therefore, IMO, there's nothing to debate here. maybe you thought I was a gun rights opponent. I actually have a few.

what a surprise.

likewise, not surprised that you dodged this invitation to choose something else, as well.

ps. real men shoot .58 minies.

Captain America

My other gun is a Phalynx....

M14 Shooter

Just as I am not surprised you're not interested in the challenge I put to you.

Someone truely capable of debate can debate both sides of an issue. You just want to debate the issues you know something about on that side that you prefer to argue.

After all, you DID say:

Shooter, you can pick the topic and I'll argue on behalf of Liberalism and you can argue on behalf of your brain damage.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/566575-post34.html

How does that go? Oh yeah:

If you don't accept, you're a coward. No way around it.