• 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!

Who Is More Afraid? The One Who Feels He Needs a Gun? Or the One Who Doesn't?

Who is more afraid? The one who feels he needs a gun, or the one who doesn't?

  • The person who feels he needs a gun is the one who's more afraid.

    Votes: 28 77.8%

  • The person who does NOT feel he needs a gun is the one who's more afraid.

    Votes: 8 22.2%
  • Total voters
    36
Black Dog said:
You are the master of the straw man... Seriously.

You have a good night because you are not worth replying to.
Click to expand...

Yeah, since when is being able to fish and grow crops important for survival in the wild?

Y'know, accusing someone of building a strawman when they're directly addressing the question presented to them is a strawman all its own....
 
Glen Contrarian said:
So you want sexual predators, sociopaths, and terrorists to be free to buy guns without any background checks or registration. Gee, you're all about freedom aren't you?
Click to expand...

only someone completely unaware of laws knows that registration doesn't apply to such people and we already have an instant BGC in place.

registration only harasses honest people. the USSC ruled those who cannot legally own guns cannot be forced to incriminate themselves by registration

so why do you support a law that cannot be used against criminals and is championed by every group that wants to ban or confiscate guns.

You are parroting all the anti gun arguments and you wonder why some think you are anti gun?
 
TurtleDude said:
only someone completely unaware of laws knows that registration doesn't apply to such people and we already have an instant BGC in place.

registration only harasses honest people. the USSC ruled those who cannot legally own guns cannot be forced to incriminate themselves by registration

so why do you support a law that cannot be used against criminals and is championed by every group that wants to ban or confiscate guns.

You are parroting all the anti gun arguments and you wonder why some think you are anti gun?
Click to expand...

Because he thinks he is fooling us by being a sheep in wolfs clothing. :lol:

I mean how does someone jump from gun registration to pedophiles?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Really? Yeah, since when do we have to worry about sex predators, sociopaths, terrorists, psychopaths, and ex-felons....
Click to expand...

I don't... I own guns... and know how to use them. :cool:
 
Glen Contrarian said:
So you want sexual predators, sociopaths, and terrorists to be free to buy guns without any background checks or registration. Gee, you're all about freedom aren't you?
Click to expand...

What? I don't want convicted criminals to be free to prey on folks at all. Why should everyone else have to play the high user fee game to buy/carry guns so that known extremely dangerous folks can roam about freely? Does registering cars keep criminals from using them?
 
All those who voted yes... Answer me this...

I have a fire alarm in my home. Is it because I am afraid? I have locks on my doors, is it because I am afraid? I have an umbrella because I don't want to get wet, not because I am afraid to get wet. The logic put forth by the OP is ridicules and defies logic.

To all those who voted yes...

You are the ones who seem to be afraid... Of guns, period.
 
TurtleDude said:
the Miller decision was one of the great failures of the FDR court. Miller won at the trial level-the government appealed but Miller didn't appear before the USSC. The court should have remanded the case back to the trial court to make a RECORD but instead they made the incredibly idiotic finding that sawed off shotguns had no militia purpose. the remand never took place because Miller died before it could happen so a record was never made which would have proven such weapons did have military utility or militia usage. Why was this idiotic-it was because the duty was on the Government to have produced evidence at the trial court of such a "fact" which was never done. Rather the USSC accepted at argument (where only one side was present) the government argument that had no support in the record.

the Court never really addressed whether the government actually had the power to so regulate small arms


so a cowardly CJ who caved denied he was a coward who caved

color me shocked

I want you to argue that FDR's creation of this federal power was consistent with either the language of the CC or the intent of the founders
Click to expand...

None of that trivia means anything to me next to the actual decision and its effect.

You often - and others on the right do this also here - talk about "the intent of the Founders". It is as if the personal musings of an individual taken from incomplete papers can somehow someway countermand or overrule the actual document given to us by 55 people acting in concert and then ratified by the states. Its a game not worth playing because it gets us nowhere. It reminds me of that science fiction short story HISTORY LESSON by Arthur C. Clarke where they discover a Disney cartoon reel in the future and then extrapolate all about this civilization and the people who lived there using it as evidence. And that is history.

http://hermiene.net/short-stories/history_lesson.html

No - I will stick with the actual document and the actual words given to us as the law of the land and leave the game of intent to those who somehow get their jollies in playing it even though its a dead end exercise to nowhere.
 
Black Dog said:
All those who voted yes... Answer me this...

I have a fire alarm in my home. Is it because I am afraid? I have locks on my doors, is it because I am afraid? I have an umbrella because I don't want to get wet, not because I am afraid to get wet. The logic put forth by the OP is ridicules and defies logic.

To all those who voted yes...

You are the ones who seem to be afraid... Of guns, period.
Click to expand...

Yes. You could well be afraid of fire and death- thus the alarm. Yes, you could well be afraid of crime and death.

Fear is indeed a very powerful and universal motivator.

The conceit that gun supporters are these big bad macho he men who feel no fear is simply a denial of reality as well as a self given pat on their own back.
 
Let me challenge you people who have this complex about guns compensating for penis size. Let me see you stop a burglar with your penis, then get back to me.
 
cpwill said:
In that case, the public harmed itself through idiocy.
Click to expand...

aha - blame the victim! Got it. I guess its inconceivable that hundreds of children visiting their states capitol would be scared seeing lots of armed men roaming about after the events of Sandy Hook were still raw and fresh. Silly children. :doh:roll:
 
cpgrad08 said:
there you go.
Click to expand...

There you go with what exactly? Your post reproducing an argument from me failed completely and utterly to establish anything other than me telling the truth which you are powerless to refute.

here was your accusation in 459 against me

You just lie about powers the constitution grants.
Click to expand...

So tell us please - in the post you reproduced from me - where was the LIE ABOUT POWERS THE CONSTITUTION GRANTS. Because you failed to state any.
 
haymarket said:
aha - blame the victim! Got it
Click to expand...

:shrug: the students were the victims. But the perpetrators were the teachers.

I guess its inconceivable that hundreds of children visiting their states capitol would be scared seeing lots of armed men roaming about after the events of Sandy Hook were still raw and fresh.
Click to expand...

Ah. That must be why we took all the police off the streets and out of the capital at the same time, right? We wouldn't want the sight of a gun to send an 8 year old into a Vietnam flashback or something.





However, I appreciate you being so honest and upfront about the correct answer to the poll in the OP. As you so clearly point out, it is the person without the gun who is most afraid.
 
haymarket said:
Yes. You could well be afraid of fire and death- thus the alarm. Yes, you could well be afraid of crime and death.
Click to expand...

That is true, but nonsense as well. The VAST majority of people do not have a fire alarm because they fear death or fire. Most don't even think it will happen to them. It is a precaution. It has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with preparedness. Sort of like we have fireman, we should get rid of fire extinguishers? So everyone who has a fire extinguisher has a fear of fire or death? :lamo

haymarket said:
Fear is indeed a very powerful and universal motivator.
Click to expand...

Yes.

haymarket said:
The conceit that gun supporters are these big bad macho he men who feel no fear is simply a denial of reality as well as a self given pat on their own back.
Click to expand...

Just like the stereotype of gun grabbers who are limp wristed pansy boys who are afraid of guns because their mommy did not give them enough attention as babies. I mean since we are using blanket generalizations that are mostly lies. :roll:
 
cpwill said:
:shrug: the students were the victims. But the perpetrators were the teachers.



Ah. That must be why we took all the police off the streets and out of the capital at the same time, right? We wouldn't want the sight of a gun to send an 8 year old into a Vietnam flashback or something.





However, I appreciate you being so honest and upfront about the correct answer to the poll in the OP. As you so clearly point out, it is the person without the gun who is most afraid.
Click to expand...

You miss the point. It is the teachers job to protect and look out for those children. And seeing kids being afraid of armed men so soon after the events of Sandy Hook was cause to withdraw them from the area and end their field trip. And a bunch of guys trying to strut their manhood in front of the world and playing GI Joe were to blame.

Kids know the difference betwen cops or soldiers and armed civillians. Its easy to tell. give them more credit than what you seem to be doing.

Fear does indeed motivate lots of gun purchases and carrying. Why be in denial about that? Does it go against the macho he man image some want to craft for gun owners?
 
Black Dog said:
That is true, but nonsense as well. The VAST majority of people do not have a fire alarm because they fear death or fire. Most don't even think it will happen to them. It is a precaution. It has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with preparedness. Sort of like we have fireman, we should get rid of fire extinguishers? So everyone who has a fire extinguisher has a fear of fire or death? :lamo



Yes.
Click to expand...

Something that is true is not nonsense.
 
haymarket said:
Something that is true is not nonsense.
Click to expand...

So the part you cut out of my reply is true? Good to know.

the stereotype of gun grabbers who are limp wristed pansy boys who are afraid of guns because their mommy did not give them enough attention as babies.
 
Black Dog said:
So the part you cut out of my reply is true? Good to know.

the stereotype of gun grabbers who are limp wristed pansy boys who are afraid of guns because their mommy did not give them enough attention as babies.
Click to expand...

You began with a false premise. Once that was disposed of - the rest of the post became irrelevant.
 
haymarket said:
You began with a false premise. Once that was disposed of - the rest of the post became irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Just like your blanket generalization. Whats the matter? You don't like your own argument all of a sudden?

And what premise would that be?
 
Black Dog said:
Just like your blanket generalization. Whats the matter? You don't like your own argument all of a sudden?

And what premise would that be?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what your first line means. But I suspect you do not like the implication that a denial of fear as a motivator on behalf of the gun supporters is part and parcel of the macho image some would have for themselves. On the other hand, those who want reasonable regulation of weapons have crafted no such contrary image of the pansy boy that you brought up. So that fallacy is the one of false equivalency.

The false premise I referred to in the other post was that truth is nonsense.
 
haymarket said:
I have no idea what your first line means. But I suspect you do not like the implication that a denial of fear as a motivator on behalf of the gun supporters is part and parcel of the macho image some would have for themselves. On the other hand, those who want reasonable regulation of weapons have crafted no such contrary image of the pansy boy that you brought up. So that fallacy is the one of false equivalency.

The false premise I referred to in the other post was that truth is nonsense.
Click to expand...

I owe you an apology...

You said "could" and yes they could. Your argument is sound and not a stereotype. I also agree some gun owners are that macho type. They are however the minority by a large margin.

You were also correct that my premise was false and I exaggerated what you said. I made a nice straw man. This however does not change the truth of my initial statement....

Black Dog said:
All those who voted yes... Answer me this...

I have a fire alarm in my home. Is it because I am afraid? I have locks on my doors, is it because I am afraid? I have an umbrella because I don't want to get wet, not because I am afraid to get wet. The logic put forth by the OP is ridicules and defies logic.

To all those who voted yes...

You are the ones who seem to be afraid... Of guns, period.
Click to expand...

It also shows how your initial reply does nothing to refute what I stated.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
None of that trivia means anything to me next to the actual decision and its effect.

You often - and others on the right do this also here - talk about "the intent of the Founders". It is as if the personal musings of an individual taken from incomplete papers can somehow someway countermand or overrule the actual document given to us by 55 people acting in concert and then ratified by the states. Its a game not worth playing because it gets us nowhere. It reminds me of that science fiction short story HISTORY LESSON by Arthur C. Clarke where they discover a Disney cartoon reel in the future and then extrapolate all about this civilization and the people who lived there using it as evidence. And that is history.

History Lesson by Arthur C. Clarke

No - I will stick with the actual document and the actual words given to us as the law of the land and leave the game of intent to those who somehow get their jollies in playing it even though its a dead end exercise to nowhere.
Click to expand...

no you don't

if you did we wouldn't get claims that Article I Sec 8 intended federal gun control or the incredibly pathetic argument that "shall not be infringed" was intended to allow infringement

you like the fact FDR just made a federal power up

AND I NOTE you have never even attempted to establish that the words of the commerce clause actually said firearms regulation in light of the 2A and the 10A more than 130 YEARS after that Clause was written


The best you did was allude TO OTHER PARTS Of Sec 8 to justify gun control but that is specious since it was the CC that FDR used


and come on-claiming you follow the actual language is a gut buster.

t
 
haymarket said:
So first we get some here saying that people have no real right to their own fears and now we have you telling parents what they should teach their kids about guns. Wonderful. :doh:shock:

ANy other control you want to have over people and their lives? :roll:
Click to expand...

What is the matter with teaching your children about guns and gun safety?
 
ernst barkmann said:
i can understand that , however leaving door unlocked, and giving a crook the easier ability to enter your place, maybe kill your pets, to steal, is not something i would like to have to live with.
Click to expand...

I'm not that paranoid.
 
APACHERAT said:
Have you ever taken in consideration that people may feel threatened by you ?

BTW: Where were you on April, 29th, 1992 ?
Click to expand...

Why would they be threatened by me?

April 29th,1992....I was living in Redondo Beach. What is your point? That the riots 20 years ago is evidence that LA is a "gang infected city under foreign occupation"? LOL.....still being a drama queen I see.
 
Black Dog said:
I owe you an apology...

You said "could" and yes they could. Your argument is sound and not a stereotype. I also agree some gun owners are that macho type. They are however the minority by a large margin.

You were also correct that my premise was false and I exaggerated what you said. I made a nice straw man. This however does not change the truth of my initial statement....



It also shows how your initial reply does nothing to refute what I stated.
Click to expand...

First - thank you. It is appreciated.

Second, I do think fear motivates lots of people. It motivates many gun buyers and owners and it motivates many people who simply do not like guns. I also would say that there are lots of people in both camps - pro and anti gun who have fear as a motive down the list. For example, a hunter who buys a rifle to hunt with is not fearful. A person who likes target or skeet shooting is not motivated by fear. By the same token, there are people who perhaps are fearful of the results of poor use of a gun but are not afraid of guns themselves. There are also people who have good reasons why they simply do not want to won a gun and fear has little to do with it.

So it is there on both sides and it is both absent on both sides as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom