• 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!

Government Buyback of Guns........a Question.

Rucker61 said:
TD lives in Ohio, I believe, and it was his point that the sponsors of SB260 know that it's ridiculous, and part of an effort to make other AWBs more acceptable.
Click to expand...

Wow, it's not that I doubt your statement...I could see CT or OH liberals trying to pull a stunt like that but we all know it actually damages chances of a rational discourse on guns.
The sponsors might think it's clever, but it really just amounts to a weak watered down version of Trumpist chaos tornadoism methods, which don't even work for Trump, except in the minds of his supporters.
To rational independents and liberals a stunt like SB260 looks irresponsible and disingenuous.
To Republicans, it screams "LIBTARDZ ARE COMIN FOR YER GUNZZ!!"
 
TurtleDude said:
the demotards in Ohio are pushing this in the hopes a less radical bill gets passed. If this passed we'd have civil war in Ohio if the Courts didn't step in

the two assholes who introduced this should be tried for treason
Click to expand...

That's a bit dramatic but they should be slapped upside the head for thinking it helps liberal positions on ANYTHING at all.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Wow, it's not that I doubt your statement...I could see CT or OH liberals trying to pull a stunt like that but we all know it actually damages chances of a rational discourse on guns.
The sponsors might think it's clever, but it really just amounts to a weak watered down version of Trumpist chaos tornadoism methods, which don't even work for Trump, except in the minds of his supporters.
To rational independents and liberals a stunt like SB260 looks irresponsible and disingenuous.
To Republicans, it screams "LIBTARDZ ARE COMIN FOR YER GUNZZ!!"
Click to expand...

the fact is-the DNC is full of hateful gun banners who really do want to ban guns and make those who own them turn them in. and as long as liberals don't hammer these nutcases, we gun owners are justified in believing that yes, the Democrat party wants to ban/confiscate guns if it could
 
TurtleDude said:
the fact is-the DNC is full of hateful gun banners who really do want to ban guns and make those who own them turn them in. and as long as liberals don't hammer these nutcases, we gun owners are justified in believing that yes, the Democrat party wants to ban/confiscate guns if it could
Click to expand...

That makes it awfully easy for you to avoid speaking with liberals who want a rational discussion. But then again, I've already tried with you in the past, and I was rational, even compromising as all Hell but I got the same answer from you, so you did "a great job" again, and I am sure your side applauds you.

And I own guns. That didn't seem to matter to you very much!
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
That makes it awfully easy for you to avoid speaking with liberals who want a rational discussion. But then again, I've already tried with you in the past, and I was rational, even compromising as all Hell but I got the same answer from you, so you did "a great job" again, and I am sure your side applauds you.

And I own guns. That didn't seem to matter to you very much!
Click to expand...

so tell me what I should compromise on. we already have numerous unconstitutional violations of the second and tenth amendments. do tell me
 
TurtleDude said:
so tell me what I should compromise on. we already have numerous unconstitutional violations of the second and tenth amendments. do tell me
Click to expand...

No, because we already had that conversation, which you cut short in much the same way.
I'm willing to have a conversation with other gun owners but I'm not interested in rehashing nonsense with you. That ship has sailed.
Maybe you can look in on other gun threads where I will be talking to others.

And besides, if you're going to start off, as you did before, by declaring that ANY and ALL ideas are "unconstitutional", then you're already signalling your fundamentalist dogma right from the start.
Go diddle someone else.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
No, because we already had that conversation, which you cut short in much the same way.
I'm willing to have a conversation with other gun owners but I'm not interested in rehashing nonsense with you. That ship has sailed.
Maybe you can look in on other gun threads where I will be talking to others.

And besides, if you're going to start off, as you did before, by declaring that ANY and ALL ideas are "unconstitutional", then you're already signalling your fundamentalist dogma right from the start.
Go diddle someone else.
Click to expand...

tell me why federal gun control should be seen as constitutional by anyone who actually respects the document? NO I am not willing to concede that point.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
I think the people in government benefit a hell of lot more from my taxes than the taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Okay - get rid of the teachers, the police, the firefighters, the military. Get rid of the OSHA and FDA and EPA inspectors who make sure your water is clean and that your food is not poisoned - you hear about their failures...but you seem to forget that before that, environmental disasters and polluted water were the norm rather than the exception. While you're at it, get rid of the judges and the lawyers who work for the state, since who needs a justice system anyway, huh? And get rid of the prison guards, too.

Let's not stop there! Let's get rid of our IRS, since nobody needs to pay taxes anyway - all the roads are already built, so who needs to repair them or keep them in good order? And when bridges fall, no need to fix them - just drive a few hundred miles around! And who needs FEMA? After all, when natural disaster strikes, leave the people be - they'll be fine in a generation or so!

Oh, and one more thing - go live in a third-world country sometime...and you know what you'll find? Terribly corrupt government, corruption beyond that which we've seen in America since Tammany Hall. Comparatively speaking, our government's MUCH less corrupt than almost any other non-first-world nation on the planet. Why? Because in almost all those other nations, government workers are paid very little...and as a result, they must accept bribes in order to put food on the table and keep a roof over their family's head. That's precisely what happens when you don't pay your government workers a middle-class wage.

But if you would really prefer to live in a third-world country, well, Your Boy Trump seems to be doing his best to make that happen...including bringing up the possibility of him being America's president for life.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Okay - get rid of the teachers, the police, the firefighters, the military. Get rid of the OSHA and FDA and EPA inspectors who make sure your water is clean and that your food is not poisoned - you hear about their failures...but you seem to forget that before that, environmental disasters and polluted water were the norm rather than the exception. While you're at it, get rid of the judges and the lawyers who work for the state, since who needs a justice system anyway, huh? And get rid of the prison guards, too.

Let's not stop there! Let's get rid of our IRS, since nobody needs to pay taxes anyway - all the roads are already built, so who needs to repair them or keep them in good order? And when bridges fall, no need to fix them - just drive a few hundred miles around! And who needs FEMA? After all, when natural disaster strikes, leave the people be - they'll be fine in a generation or so!

Oh, and one more thing - go live in a third-world country sometime...and you know what you'll find? Terribly corrupt government, corruption beyond that which we've seen in America since Tammany Hall. Comparatively speaking, our government's MUCH less corrupt than almost any other non-first-world nation on the planet. Why? Because in almost all those other nations, government workers are paid very little...and as a result, they must accept bribes in order to put food on the table and keep a roof over their family's head. That's precisely what happens when you don't pay your government workers a middle-class wage.

But if you would really prefer to live in a third-world country, well, Your Boy Trump seems to be doing his best to make that happen...including bringing up the possibility of him being America's president for life.
Click to expand...

wow-an academy award for leading llama in a internet drama!
 
Glen Contrarian said:
. Comparatively speaking, our government's MUCH less corrupt than almost any other non-first-world nation on the planet.
Click to expand...

Are we a non first world country? I guess this means you agree with me.:thumbs:
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Are we a non first world country? I guess this means you agree with me.:thumbs:
Click to expand...

You know what I meant. Remove the word "other" from my post, and that is what I meant.

BTW, I once paid off a judge in a third-world nation to get my brother-in-law out of jail on drug charges. There, he was a lazy good-for-nothing criminal. Here in America today, he's holding down a full-time job providing for himself and his youngest son, and his oldest son is about to graduate from an Ivy League university this May with a degree in immunology...and will be going straight to med school.

You see, that's what happens with most immigrants who are not successful moneymakers in their own countries - they come to America and they're suddenly out of their "comfort zone"...and they're pushed to work and succeed by their fellow immigrants. That really is the way it works with immigrants - that's why they happily take the worst or hardest or longest jobs. That's why they become field workers doing backbreaking work picking fruit, or become caregivers wiping poopy butts for a living. The other immigrants push them to succeed because when one immigrant becomes a lazy good-for-nothing here, the other immigrants of the same nationality KNOW that that one immigrant's laziness reflects upon all the rest of them. I've seen it myself.

That was the wisdom of the lines of Ezra Pound's "The New Colossus" at the base of our Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your wretched refuse"...because even then, people knew that when someone arrives on our shores with the willingness to work their asses off (and combined with a real hope of success, of becoming a part of the middle class or even rich), that is a great benefit to all of us. Unfortunately, thanks to Your Boy Trump, USCIS now no longer says that we are a nation of immigrants (as if anyone here except for full-blood Native Americans isn't the child or descendant of an immigrant)...and we're screwing ourselves over as a result. We as a nation are willfully refusing to be Reagan's "shining city on a hill"...because we're metaphorically closing our gates to all but what the Right thinks should be the chosen few.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
...as if anyone here except for full-blood Native Americans isn't the child or descendant of an immigrant)...
Click to expand...

Actually, there ARE NO "Native Americans."

There are only "First Immigrants."

Nobody was native to this Continent.

What are now erroneously called "Native Americans" were just the first ones to wander in. You can't really call them immigrants, just as you can't call the early English invaders immigrants.

They came as invaders rather than immigrants.

So, there are the "First Wanderers" and the "Invaders" and the immigrants.

Official immigration didn't start until long, long after the arrival of the invaders.
 
Vox said:
Actually, there ARE NO "Native Americans."

There are only "First Immigrants."

Nobody was native to this Continent.

What are now erroneously called "Native Americans" were just the first ones to wander in. You can't really call them immigrants, just as you can't call the early English invaders immigrants.

They came as invaders rather than immigrants.

So, there are the "First Wanderers" and the "Invaders" and the immigrants.

Official immigration didn't start until long, long after the arrival of the invaders.
Click to expand...

Now you're trying to split hairs, using what you KNOW are weak rhetorical excuses to justify your claims.
 
From what I've heard these gun buy-back programs aren't really all that effective.
Didn't the one in Australia only buy back some fraction of the guns that where already in the public?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
You know what I meant. Remove the word "other" from my post, and that is what I meant.

BTW, I once paid off a judge in a third-world nation to get my brother-in-law out of jail on drug charges. There, he was a lazy good-for-nothing criminal. Here in America today, he's holding down a full-time job providing for himself and his youngest son, and his oldest son is about to graduate from an Ivy League university this May with a degree in immunology...and will be going straight to med school.

You see, that's what happens with most immigrants who are not successful moneymakers in their own countries - they come to America and they're suddenly out of their "comfort zone"...and they're pushed to work and succeed by their fellow immigrants. That really is the way it works with immigrants - that's why they happily take the worst or hardest or longest jobs. That's why they become field workers doing backbreaking work picking fruit, or become caregivers wiping poopy butts for a living. The other immigrants push them to succeed because when one immigrant becomes a lazy good-for-nothing here, the other immigrants of the same nationality KNOW that that one immigrant's laziness reflects upon all the rest of them. I've seen it myself.

That was the wisdom of the lines of Ezra Pound's "The New Colossus" at the base of our Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your wretched refuse"...because even then, people knew that when someone arrives on our shores with the willingness to work their asses off (and combined with a real hope of success, of becoming a part of the middle class or even rich), that is a great benefit to all of us. Unfortunately, thanks to Your Boy Trump, USCIS now no longer says that we are a nation of immigrants (as if anyone here except for full-blood Native Americans isn't the child or descendant of an immigrant)...and we're screwing ourselves over as a result. We as a nation are willfully refusing to be Reagan's "shining city on a hill"...because we're metaphorically closing our gates to all but what the Right thinks should be the chosen few.
Click to expand...

You do know she was just a socialist poet and has nothing to do with our immigration laws or policies. Her poem does not condone breaking our laws. That is a pathetic argument at best.
 
Vox said:
So they propose to give me my own money and take my guns?
Click to expand...

This makes no sense. You can pay something with more than cash.
For example, imagine you want to buy a car worth 10'000$. The dealer agrees to take your old car, estimated at 3'000$. Now, you'll only have to pay 7'000$.

It's like you paid 3'000$, it just wasn't cash. You paid it with your old car.

Likewise, you would pay your taxes with a combination of money AND gun sales. The sale of the gun will make you pay less taxes, basically.

So really, I don't get your point. They won't give you "your own money". They will take the money from everyone else. But that's always what happens when the government pays for something. I suppose that, if the gun is in good condition, it could be used by the police force / the military. The metals and parts could always be recycled also.
 
Vox said:
How can the government buy back my guns??

The government has no money but what it takes from me in taxes.

So they propose to give me my own money and take my guns?

"Curiouser and curiouser," said Alice.
Click to expand...

They hand you an ioy and borrow from China.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Now you're trying to split hairs, using what you KNOW are weak rhetorical excuses to justify your claims.
Click to expand...

Ummmmm.......not quite.

It's more like STRONG and IRREFUTABLE facts to justify my claims.

:2wave:
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Despite the legal rhetoric, taxes, sir, are not YOUR money. Taxes are the price of admission to life in the country that you're paying taxes to.
Click to expand...

I think that was King George III's gambit.

From my history books didn't guns resolve this issue into another paradigm?
 
Cisero said:
This makes no sense. You can pay something with more than cash.
For example, imagine you want to buy a car worth 10'000$. The dealer agrees to take your old car, estimated at 3'000$. Now, you'll only have to pay 7'000$.

It's like you paid 3'000$, it just wasn't cash. You paid it with your old car.

Likewise, you would pay your taxes with a combination of money AND gun sales. The sale of the gun will make you pay less taxes, basically.

So really, I don't get your point. They won't give you "your own money". They will take the money from everyone else. But that's always what happens when the government pays for something. I suppose that, if the gun is in good condition, it could be used by the police force / the military. The metals and parts could always be recycled also.
Click to expand...

Wow......you make it sound like a tax refund. I feel better already.
 
SirGareth said:
I think that was King George III's gambit.

From my history books didn't guns resolve this issue into another paradigm?
Click to expand...

That's not anyone's "gambit". That's a simple fact. There may be great disagreement on who is taxed or how the taxes are imposed, but the collection of taxes is crucial for the preservation of any nation...and the greater the infrastructure requirements of a nation, the greater the tax revenue will need to be.

And guns are not necessary for a successful revolution. The world's largest democracy - India - didn't need guns to make it happen. What it takes is courage.
 
Vox said:
How can the government buy back my guns??

The government has no money but what it takes from me in taxes.

So they propose to give me my own money and take my guns?

"Curiouser and curiouser," said Alice.
Click to expand...

Once you give the money to the government it's not yours anymore. In the same way that if you paid me to do some work for you and then I bought something from you and paid you some money for it. It doesn't matter whether the money came from you or from your neighbor or from someone else. I'm paying you for the product that you are selling. You're trying to play incredibly childish word games to make this seem ridiculous. And it's not. It's a very simple process if you aren't trying to play verbal gymnastics.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
You do know she was just a socialist poet and has nothing to do with our immigration laws or policies. Her poem does not condone breaking our laws. That is a pathetic argument at best.
Click to expand...

And every Republican of note, from the day the poem was engraved at the base of the statue up to and including George W. Bush, ALL enthusiastically supported the spirit of the poem. From Ronald Reagan's speech at the Statue of Liberty:

While we applaud those immigrants who stand out, whose contributions are easily discerned, we know that America's heroes are also those whose names are remembered by only a few. Many of them passed through this harbor, went by this lady, looked up at her torch, which we light tonight in their honor.
They were the men and women who labored all their lives so that their children would be well fed, clothed, and educated, the families that went through great hardship yet kept their honor, their dignity, and their faith in God. They passed on to their children those values, values that define civilization and are the prerequisites of human progress. They worked in our factories, on ships and railroads, in stores, and on road construction crews. They were teachers, lumberjacks, seamstresses, and journalists. They came from every land.

What was it that tied these profoundly different people together? What was it that made them not a gathering of individuals, but a nation? That bond that held them together, as it holds us together tonight, that bond that has stood every test and travail, is found deep in our national consciousness: an abiding love of liberty. For love of liberty, our forebears—colonists, few in number and with little to defend themselves—fought a war for independence with what was then the world's most powerful empire. For love of liberty, those who came before us tamed a vast wilderness and braved hardships which, at times, were beyond the limits of human endurance. For love of liberty, a bloody and heart-wrenching civil war was fought. And for love of liberty, Americans championed and still champion, even in times of peril, the cause of human freedom in far-off lands.

"The God who gave us life," Thomas Jefferson once proclaimed, "gave us liberty at the same time." But like all of God's precious gifts, liberty must never be taken for granted. Tonight we thank God for the many blessings He has bestowed on our land; we affirm our faithfulness to His rule and to our own ideals; and we pledge to keep alive the dream that brought our forefathers and mothers to this brave new land.

On this theme the poet Emma Lazarus, moved by this unique symbol of the love of liberty, wrote a very special dedication 100 years ago. The last few lines are ones we know so well; set to the music of Irving Berlin, they take on tonight a special meaning.

{At this point, a choir sang the last few lines from the poem "The New Colossus."}

We are the keepers of the flame of liberty. We hold it high tonight for the world to see, a beacon of hope, a light unto the nations. And so with joy and celebration and with a prayer that this lamp shall never be extinguished, I ask that you all join me in this symbolic act of faith, this lighting of Miss Liberty's torch.

Of course, to today's Right, people like Reagan are nothing more than left-wing socialist extremists.....
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And every Republican of note, from the day the poem was engraved at the base of the statue up to and including George W. Bush, ALL enthusiastically supported the spirit of the poem. From Ronald Reagan's speech at the Statue of Liberty:

While we applaud those immigrants who stand out, whose contributions are easily discerned, we know that America's heroes are also those whose names are remembered by only a few. Many of them passed through this harbor, went by this lady, looked up at her torch, which we light tonight in their honor.
They were the men and women who labored all their lives so that their children would be well fed, clothed, and educated, the families that went through great hardship yet kept their honor, their dignity, and their faith in God. They passed on to their children those values, values that define civilization and are the prerequisites of human progress. They worked in our factories, on ships and railroads, in stores, and on road construction crews. They were teachers, lumberjacks, seamstresses, and journalists. They came from every land.

What was it that tied these profoundly different people together? What was it that made them not a gathering of individuals, but a nation? That bond that held them together, as it holds us together tonight, that bond that has stood every test and travail, is found deep in our national consciousness: an abiding love of liberty. For love of liberty, our forebears—colonists, few in number and with little to defend themselves—fought a war for independence with what was then the world's most powerful empire. For love of liberty, those who came before us tamed a vast wilderness and braved hardships which, at times, were beyond the limits of human endurance. For love of liberty, a bloody and heart-wrenching civil war was fought. And for love of liberty, Americans championed and still champion, even in times of peril, the cause of human freedom in far-off lands.

"The God who gave us life," Thomas Jefferson once proclaimed, "gave us liberty at the same time." But like all of God's precious gifts, liberty must never be taken for granted. Tonight we thank God for the many blessings He has bestowed on our land; we affirm our faithfulness to His rule and to our own ideals; and we pledge to keep alive the dream that brought our forefathers and mothers to this brave new land.

On this theme the poet Emma Lazarus, moved by this unique symbol of the love of liberty, wrote a very special dedication 100 years ago. The last few lines are ones we know so well; set to the music of Irving Berlin, they take on tonight a special meaning.

{At this point, a choir sang the last few lines from the poem "The New Colossus."}

We are the keepers of the flame of liberty. We hold it high tonight for the world to see, a beacon of hope, a light unto the nations. And so with joy and celebration and with a prayer that this lamp shall never be extinguished, I ask that you all join me in this symbolic act of faith, this lighting of Miss Liberty's torch.

Of course, to today's Right, people like Reagan are nothing more than left-wing socialist extremists.....
Click to expand...

It is a wonderful poem but still has nothing to do with our immigration laws.

When that poem was written a lot of my ancestor were coming to this country or had already came here. They were screwed and duped by the people who advertised how this was the land of milk and honey. They came here and found the land was owned by the coal company and the great jobs were in the mines. They also found out the milk and honey were only in the house of the rich who exploited the immigrants coming here the same as we are doing today. Yes when they came into New York harbor they cheered for they believed the good life was upon them. They did not know that the good life was several generation away. They did not know their children would die in the coal mines at 8 years old. They did not know their husband who worked for less than poverty wages would never see 30 years of age. They fought and died to overcome these terrible conditions so their children could have the good life. Unfortunately everything they spent over 100 years fixing is being undone today thanks to the breaking of our immigration laws and the exploitation of illegal aliens.

Sorry if I do not support breaking of our laws, the exploitation of people, and destruction of everything my ancestors fought for.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
It is a wonderful poem but still has nothing to do with our immigration laws.

When that poem was written a lot of my ancestor were coming to this country or had already came here. They were screwed and duped by the people who advertised how this was the land of milk and honey. They came here and found the land was owned by the coal company and the great jobs were in the mines. They also found out the milk and honey were only in the house of the rich who exploited the immigrants coming here the same as we are doing today. Yes when they came into New York harbor they cheered for they believed the good life was upon them. They did not know that the good life was several generation away. They did not know their children would die in the coal mines at 8 years old. They did not know their husband who worked for less than poverty wages would never see 30 years of age. They fought and died to overcome these terrible conditions so their children could have the good life. Unfortunately everything they spent over 100 years fixing is being undone today thanks to the breaking of our immigration laws and the exploitation of illegal aliens.

Sorry if I do not support breaking of our laws, the exploitation of people, and destruction of everything my ancestors fought for.
Click to expand...

The poem has nothing to do with our immigration laws...but everything to do what has been our national ethos for generations. Y'all are turning your backs on what has been America's national ethos since long before any of us were born.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom