- Joined
- Apr 29, 2017
- Messages
- 11,166
- Reaction score
- 3,034
- Location
- A country liberals hate. America.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
If you honestly want the answer, take 5 minutes to watch this.
Then you should watch the entire video.I was hoping to hear some actual defenses of assault rifle ownership, but all I heard was "You can't ask us anything! It's in the BoR!", like that settles the issue.
For the record, I'm fine with people owning AR-15's and whatnot. I'm even fine with people owning automatic weapons, so long as the meet the legal standards as defined by the ATF regulations.
But this guys contempt for Americans that want sensible gun laws, and to discuss the liability each class of firearm poses, is what will lead to the 2A getting wiped out eventually.
I was hoping to hear some actual defenses of assault rifle ownership, but all I heard was "You can't ask us anything! It's in the BoR!", like that settles the issue.
For the record, I'm fine with people owning AR-15's and whatnot. I'm even fine with people owning automatic weapons, so long as the meet the legal standards as defined by the ATF regulations.
But this guys contempt for Americans that want sensible gun laws, and to discuss the liability each class of firearm poses, is what will lead to the 2A getting wiped out eventually.
Seriously? Take your own advise and watch the video yourself, the guy is seething with contempt because people ask the sensible question of what the average citizen needs weapons like an AR-15 for.Then you should watch the entire video.
Can you cite an example of that contempt?
The latter would be a machine gun.An AR-15 is not an assault rifle. An assault rifle is a gun in which you can flip a switch to go from one shot per pull of the trigger to multiple shots per pull of the trigger. ]
Proven? What do you count as proof? I've yet to see any evidence whatsoever that gun ownership is having any effect on violent crime levels. In fact, the stats tend to go the other way around.And I have yet to hear of one single "sensible gun law" that is actually proven to do what is claimed that they will do.
Seriously? Take your own advise and watch the video yourself, the guy is seething with contempt because people ask the sensible question of what the average citizen needs weapons like an AR-15 for.
I'm not going to give you a transcript of the video.
Just because I didn't come away with the impressions you did, that doesn't give you the right of way to start insinuating I didn't watch the video.I watched every second. If that was all you heard, YOU should watch it.
The latter would be a machine gun.
Proven? What do you count as proof? I've yet to see any evidence whatsoever that gun ownership is having any effect on violent crime levels. In fact, the stats tend to go the other way around.
The latter would be a machine gun.
Proven? What do you count as proof? I've yet to see any evidence whatsoever that gun ownership is having any effect on violent crime levels. In fact, the stats tend to go the other way around.
Fine.Correct. But your first sentence was in direct response to what was being talked about in the video. Which had nothing to do with machine guns. Ergo, you were talking about AR-15's when you said "assault rifle".
No, it goes both ways. I have to support my arguments and you have to support yours, this is not a one way street. I'm not looking to go down the same rabbit hole on gun laws that we just went down a few day ago with you, as we're unlikely to do any better at finding common ground.Pretty sure you know what "proven" means. And its not our job to prove anything. It's your job to prove claims asserted by you.
Just because I didn't come away with the impressions you did, that doesn't give you the right of way to start insinuating I didn't watch the video.
You're allowed to formulate your opinions on how gun control proponents come across, and I'm allowed to do the same in regard to gun right proponents.
I said that the way he came across in the video was contemptuous of gun control proponents.You are the one that stated, all you heard was something he never said. As to your first sentence, that was you implying I had not watched it, so...
I said that the way he came across in the video was contemptuous of gun control proponents.
He acted like it's unreasonable to even ask why people want AR-15's, and that people don't have the right to ask 'just because, 2A'.Again, how?
He acted like it's unreasonable to even ask why people want AR-15's, and that people don't have the right to ask 'just because, 2A'.
No, it goes both ways. I have to support my arguments and you have to support yours, this is not a one way street. I'm not looking to go down the same rabbit hole on gun laws that we just went down a few day ago with you, as we're unlikely to do any better at finding common ground.
I get that you want to bait me into going down the rabbit hole with you again, but it's not going to work.Actually no, it doesn't go both ways. When a claim is made the onus is upon the claimant to prove their claim. No one else has to prove anything. You stated that common sense gun laws are needed. Ok. Which common sense gun laws? Why? And prove that they will do what you want them to do. Once you do that then the onus will be upon others to either disprove what you have stated or concede. After that the onus is back on you. This continues until one or the other concedes. That is how debate works and, incidentally, how our court system works.
He doesn't have to explain himself.Even if that is how he came across, do you feel that you are somehow entitled to a response or he is in any way obligated to explain himself to you or anyone else?
I get that you want to bait me into going down the rabbit hole with you again, but it's not going to work.
My last two exchanges with you were unpleasant and unproductive, so I'm not going to waste my time again.
He doesn't have to explain himself.
I also don't have to explain my reasoning for gun control, if I decide to vote for representatives that will change the laws either. It can go both ways.
Not every thread that is related gun control has to derail into a conversation on the whole enchilada. It's too complex, and too tiring to do that every time somebody wants to go down that path.If you don't want to be challenged or debate then why post about this subject?
Actually.....as it is a right, you need a pretty rational and logical reason to begin eroding it.
As a belief system, no....you don't have to explain it, and I really don't care about an individuals personal belief until they act on it in a way that is counter to the Constitution and the bill of rights, be they private citizens or public servants and politicians.
I doubt very much there's anything I'm going to lay out logic wise that's going to change your mind, so I don't see the point in doing it 'just because'. All we'll do is waste each others time and energy.Actually.....as it is a right, you need a pretty rational and logical reason to begin eroding it.
As a belief system, no....you don't have to explain it, and I really don't care about an individuals personal belief until they act on it in a way that is counter to the Constitution and the bill of rights, be they private citizens or public servants and politicians.