• 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!

The Gun Control movement banks on dishonesty [W:103]

Fenton Lum said:
I'm a gun owner, permitted to carry, **** the NRA, left them once they became a political organization.
Click to expand...

sure you are. I believe that, I really do. why are you against a pro gun organization?
 
jet57 said:
I gave you absolute proof that NRA shill for the gun industry and perpetuates the lie that the second amendment is under attack.

I've given absolute proof that the second amendment is not an unlimited right.

I given absolute proof that this country has a long history of gun control laws that dates back to the colonial period when the second amendment was much fresher in the minds of citizens.

I've given absolute proof that American terrorists can buy their weapons or otherwise get them fee and clear in this country.

I've shown time and time again that the gun good version of the second amendment and the reality have never matched.

All you've show is denial of facts with nothing to back it up.
Click to expand...
If you have all this "absolute" truth then why aren't guns banned like in the U.K.? If it's so "absolute" then what's the problem? If indeed it is "absolute" then does that mean you are also a "gun thug"? "Gun thug" must be anyone that owns a gun which makes YOU a "gun thug" and if you really do own that M-1 carbine then you best hand it in or destroy it. So what's ya gonna do?
 
zsu2357 said:
If you have all this "absolute" truth then why aren't guns banned like in the U.K.? If it's so "absolute" then what's the problem? If indeed it is "absolute" then does that mean you are also a "gun thug"? "Gun thug" must be anyone that owns a gun which makes YOU a "gun thug" and if you really do own that M-1 carbine then you best hand it in or destroy it. So what's ya gonna do?
Click to expand...

I'm very happy to provide you further education; I'll let you know when the next class will begin.

Homework: Ask Turtledude why the Supreme Court says he's wrong.
 
ThoughtEx. said:
do what now? I was commenting that they already took his right to own a firearm away. Can't take it a second time. If he's a felon. I for one think felons should be able to own guns legally. Makes it easier to catch them if they use their registered firearm vs a black market fire arm if they ever use a gun to commit a crime.
Click to expand...


we don't have gun registration in most states.
 
jet57 said:
I'm very happy to provide you further education; I'll let you know when the next class will begin.

Homework: Ask Turtledude why the Supreme Court says he's wrong.
Click to expand...

why are you so afraid to address me Jet? is it because I constantly school your dishonest nonsense? such as your idiotic claim that an AR 15 is a "weapon of war" or that ten round magazines are ONLY FOR WARFARE

your posts do serve a post useful function-they demonstrate the dishonesty of the anti gun posters in general.
 
Slingshot Bob said:
Section 790.001 (1) is the relevant part
Click to expand...

And the handgun you put in your picture was physically made before 1918? Or is it a replica that takes ammunition not readily available in the normal channels of commerce? So you have to prove providence on that gun actually being manufactured before 1918. Otherwise you could get into some trouble. And I doubt Johny Law is going to patiently wait for you to find the certificate of authenticity while they're yelling gun and beating you down.

Either way, my point was originally, they already took your right to own fire arms. Can't take it a second time...
 
ThoughtEx. said:
And the handgun you put in your picture was physically made before 1918? Or is it a replica that takes ammunition not readily available in the normal channels of commerce? So you have to prove providence on that gun actually being manufactured before 1918. Otherwise you could get into some trouble. And I doubt Johny Law is going to patiently wait for you to find the certificate of authenticity while they're yelling gun and beating you down.

Either way, my point was originally, they already took your right to own fire arms. Can't take it a second time...
Click to expand...

Or it's a black powder handgun replica

Black Powder Revolvers
 
=ThoughtEx.;1067344370]do what now? I was commenting that they already took his right to own a firearm away. Can't take it a second time. If he's a felon.
Click to expand...
I don't know anything about a firearms being taken. So not sure what's meant by a second time if he's a felon. But all felons are lumped together kinda one size fits all.
I for one think felons should be able to own guns legally. Makes it easier to catch them if they use their registered firearm vs a black market fire arm if they ever use a gun to commit a crime.
Click to expand...
Own guns legally will I agree.Short of murder,rape and real violent felonies.Am curious though what makes a registered firearm easier to trace than say one on the black market if said gun were used in a crime?
Of course barring the fact the perp is stupid. Bob hope you don't mind.
 
Last edited:
ThoughtEx. said:
And the handgun you put in your picture was physically made before 1918? Or is it a replica that takes ammunition not readily available in the normal channels of commerce? So you have to prove providence on that gun actually being manufactured before 1918. Otherwise you could get into some trouble. And I doubt Johny Law is going to patiently wait for you to find the certificate of authenticity while they're yelling gun and beating you down.

Either way, my point was originally, they already took your right to own fire arms. Can't take it a second time...
Click to expand...

Point taken, but you missed a key word, the addition of the words "or, a reproduction thereof" is the key. Mine is a pieta reproduction made in 2007 in Italy. And your point about cops is valid, I never carry it unless going to woods to shoot, even then I keep a copy of the statutes in my shooting bag, there would still be an issue of concealment, though. But attempting to open carry it is crazy.

I rarely shoot it. Next time I take it out will be looking for a hog.
 
=jet57;1067344375]I'm very happy to provide you further education; I'll let you know when the next class will begin.
Click to expand...
And this has what to do with what I ask in post #77?
Homework: Ask Turtledude why the Supreme Court says he's wrong.
Click to expand...
Ah TD as per some sort of idiotic homework assignment I'm supposed to ask.WTF why not. OK why does the SC say your wrong?:eek:uch:
 
zsu2357 said:
And this has what to do with what I ask in post #77?

Ah TD as per some sort of idiotic homework assignment I'm supposed to ask.WTF why not. OK why does the SC say your wrong?:eek:uch:
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with trying to understand your overlord.

Why is he wrong?
 
zsu2357 said:
And this has what to do with what I ask in post #77?

Ah TD as per some sort of idiotic homework assignment I'm supposed to ask.WTF why not. OK why does the SC say your wrong?:eek:uch:
Click to expand...

for about a year, Jet has been afraid to actually respond to my posts. such is the destruction I have visited upon the nonsense he posts on gun issues such as claiming that any magazine that holds ten rounds or more is only for WARFARE. he, like many gun banners, reads Heller for the dicta rather than the main holding. He seems to think Heller approved all sorts of gun bans when in reality it was superfluous language that acknowledged certain state powers and that those who have been adjudicated felons, can be deprived-through due process-of certain constitutional rights.
 
jet57 said:
It has everything to do with trying to understand your overlord.

Why is he wrong?
Click to expand...

why don't you stop playing stupid games and try to argue why I am wrong, Jet, rather than hiding?
 
jet57 said:
I'm very happy to provide you further education; I'll let you know when the next class will begin.

Homework: Ask Turtledude why the Supreme Court says he's wrong.
Click to expand...

If your past posts are any indication, you can't provide an education on anything relating to guns, gun laws, the 2nd amendment or the definition of "assault weapon". I'll eagerly await your "class" as I could use a good laugh.
 
RedAkston said:
If your past posts are any indication, you can't provide an education on anything relating to guns, gun laws, the 2nd amendment or the definition of "assault weapon". I'll eagerly await your "class" as I could use a good laugh.
Click to expand...

Since you have been utterly unable to credibly refute any of the facts that I continue to lay out in these discussions for your edification; and that of Turtledude, and since by your account, you know more than I do, I challenge you to credibly and with source material refute and prove wrong anything I've said on the subject of the OP being an absolute lie, OR that the second amendment is not unlimited, OR that an AR15 is a military Combat weapon etc etc.


Ga'head RedAkston- prove me wrong.
 
jet57 said:
Since you have been utterly unable to credibly refute any of the facts that I continue to lay out in these discussions for your edification; and that of Turtledude, and since by your account, you know more than I do, I challenge you to credibly and with source material refute and prove wrong anything I've said on the subject of the OP being an absolute lie, OR that the second amendment is not unlimited, OR that an AR15 is a military Combat weapon etc etc.


Ga'head RedAkston- prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

You made the claim it was a lie. You have yet to back up that claim. They don't need to prove anything as they made no claim.

I await your non-responce.
 
Black Dog said:
You made the claim it was a lie. You have yet to back up that claim. They don't need to prove anything as they made no claim.

I await your non-responce.
Click to expand...

I posted an article on the NRA and the lies they spew.

you know its going to be more schemes to disarm you and rape your second amendment rights
Click to expand...

Where's the proof that the boogieman is after your guns.
 
jet57 said:
I posted an article on the NRA and the lies they spew.
Click to expand...

You posted an article about the gun lobby supporting the NRA, it had nothing at all to do with the OP being a lie.

Tell us another one.

jet57 said:
Where's the proof that the boogieman is after your guns.
Click to expand...

Red Herring...

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.

So do you have anything besides hot air?
 
Black Dog said:
You posted an article about the gun lobby supporting the NRA, it had nothing at all to do with the OP being a lie.

Tell us another one.



Red Herring...

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.

So do you have anything besides hot air?
Click to expand...

I posted an article that says that NRA is a lying shill for the gun manufactures and that the propaganda that the NRA spews about a boogieman talking your guns away through a change in lexicon is also a lie.

The OP had in no way shape form or fashion come anywhere near close to showing that altering rhetorical language in gun control is taking away your guns.

Turtledude is selling product again.
 
jet57 said:
I posted an article that says that NRA is a lying shill for the gun manufactures and that the propaganda that the NRA spews about a boogieman talking your guns away through a change in lexicon is also a lie.
Click to expand...

Then please feel free to point out where in the 2 articles you posted it says...

lying shilling for the gun manufacturers through NRA mouth pieces. - Jet57

This Is How The Gun Industry Funds The NRA - Business Insider

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterco.../#3b96ee0d2506

I see nothing in either one about any lying.

jet57 said:
The OP had in no way shape form or fashion come anywhere near close to showing that altering rhetorical language in gun control is taking away your guns.

Turtledude is selling product again.
Click to expand...

Actually it did...

“Gun Control?” How about “gun safety?”

(6). Gun Control: Yikes! That sounds like you want to control people, and all those “freedom loving” folks who want to bully gays and people of color into staying in their place will use that word against you. Every time you complain about the latest tragic news about people getting shot for no good reasons, these gun nuts will whine about how you’re trying to “control” them and take away their “freedom.” So let’s add “Gun Control” to the list of phrases progressives need to ditch.

Instead, let’s talk about Gun Safety. It not only sounds a lot more reasonable, it’s the truth. Liberals are Americans, after all, and they often love their guns, too. Most people who worry about our nation’s alarming amount of gun violence and gun-related injuries and death just want more gun safety measures in place. - 15 Phrases ?Progressives? Need To Ditch (And What We Can Say Instead) | Addicting Info | The Knowledge You Crave

The terminology is the latest effort by gun-control activists to get rid of the term "gun control," the same way estate-tax opponents always talk about abolishing the "death tax," gay-marriage activists now prefer to talk about "marriage equality," and advocates for the rights of illegal immigrants carefully refer to them as "undocumented workers." Whether you see these terms as laudably neutral or Orwellian attempts at culture-shaping probably depends on your view of the issues involved. - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/01/dont-call-it-gun-control/267259/

And the OP article...

Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty, who has a history of supporting gun control measures, advises anti-gunners to disguise their intentions by calling gun control by another name: “gun safety.” Second Amendment activists long ago figured this one out, but now Esty, with a solid gun control track record, has essentially made it official. - Connecticut Rep. Esty Encourages Gun Control Trickery - LPP

Try again.
 
Black Dog said:
Then please feel free to point out where in the 2 articles you posted it says...

lying shilling for the gun manufacturers through NRA mouth pieces. - Jet57

This Is How The Gun Industry Funds The NRA - Business Insider

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterco.../#3b96ee0d2506

I see nothing in either one about any lying.



Actually it did...

“Gun Control?” How about “gun safety?”

(6). Gun Control: Yikes! That sounds like you want to control people, and all those “freedom loving” folks who want to bully gays and people of color into staying in their place will use that word against you. Every time you complain about the latest tragic news about people getting shot for no good reasons, these gun nuts will whine about how you’re trying to “control” them and take away their “freedom.” So let’s add “Gun Control” to the list of phrases progressives need to ditch.

Instead, let’s talk about Gun Safety. It not only sounds a lot more reasonable, it’s the truth. Liberals are Americans, after all, and they often love their guns, too. Most people who worry about our nation’s alarming amount of gun violence and gun-related injuries and death just want more gun safety measures in place. - 15 Phrases ?Progressives? Need To Ditch (And What We Can Say Instead) | Addicting Info | The Knowledge You Crave

The terminology is the latest effort by gun-control activists to get rid of the term "gun control," the same way estate-tax opponents always talk about abolishing the "death tax," gay-marriage activists now prefer to talk about "marriage equality," and advocates for the rights of illegal immigrants carefully refer to them as "undocumented workers." Whether you see these terms as laudably neutral or Orwellian attempts at culture-shaping probably depends on your view of the issues involved. - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/01/dont-call-it-gun-control/267259/

And the OP article...

Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty, who has a history of supporting gun control measures, advises anti-gunners to disguise their intentions by calling gun control by another name: “gun safety.” Second Amendment activists long ago figured this one out, but now Esty, with a solid gun control track record, has essentially made it official. - Connecticut Rep. Esty Encourages Gun Control Trickery - LPP

Try again.
Click to expand...

so when you hear crap like "gun safety" or "common sense" or "reasonable" gun laws you know its going to be more schemes to disarm you and rape your second amendment rights
Click to expand...

Sorry, lifetime member of the NRA who deals in gun business and posts lying material like that?


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/nra-lie-obama-gun-control-registry-survey/

The survey, provided to Mother Jones by a reader, claims that “President Obama has supported a national gun registration system allowing federal government officials to keep track of all your firearm purchases.” This is an all-too-common NRA talking point. NRA honcho Wayne LaPierre echoed it in January, saying that Obama “wants to put every private, personal transaction under the thumb of the federal government, and he wants to keep all those names in a massive federal registry.”

That’s not true.
Click to expand...


http://www.thedailybeast.com/will-the-nras-wayne-lapierre-ever-stop-lying

“They are coming to take your guns away!” That was the message from this past weekend’s annual NRA Convention. In fact, it’s the same message we have heard for years from the NRA. And just as it has been in the past, as it was this weekend, that message is a lie.
Click to expand...

The NRA lies repeatedly and habitually because the NRA works for the gun industry and as such, NRA members who post such crap as in the OP of this thread are also lying.

So, I prove my point again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom