[W:446]Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

[roguenuke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

No...that would be like saying people that cant get pregnant have no business talking about abortion rights.

Which is a stupid argument and I believe it is what the OP is pointing out. People have a right to discuss issues. Men (and women) opposed to abortion certainly have the right to their opinions.

The OP started a stupid thread on the premise that most prochoice people say that men have no right to discuss/be involved in the abortion debate, which is not a position held by most prochoice. What is being said is that abortion being legal or restricted naturally affects mainly/disproportionately the rights of women or those who can get pregnant (which at the moment is women) than any other recognized person. Hence women and their rights being the center of that discussion. When restricted, a woman has less rights to bodily autonomy than a man. The unborn has no recognized rights under our Constitution, and the rights of a man as a father only come into play once the child is born. A man doesnt get either visitation or have to pay child support until the baby is born. He can be excluded from the delivery room even. Even immediately after birth, until paternity is established, a man has no rights to the child.

Gender/sex have nothing to do with the gun debate. No single sex has their rights disproportionately affected by laws affecting guns, ownership, restrictions, limitations, or completely free and open carry and ownership. Every adult would have equal rights there to other adults.

They are not comparable.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Six unarmed teachers lost their lives at Sandy Hook because none of them were armed for self-defense.

Do you have evidence that any of those teachers would have chosen to be armed and been able to take down the shooter without getting killed first?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

The end result is the same, she gets raped.


Ummm, no. It is illegal for felons to get guns. Rape is a felony. So allowing a woman who is not a felon access to guns is not the same as allowing rapists access to guns.

Most rape victims know their rapists. It isnt someone holding them at gun point, but rather someone they are alone with who likely would know if they have a weapon on them which would be the only way it would be useful there.

I'm for carrying a gun or other weapon for defense, but it is stupid to assume women carrying a weapon could always prevent her rape. Hell, in many places where gun laws are very few and far between, women are still raped. You cant mandate a woman be armed at all times and even you did you cant force her to use it or use it well enough to prevent her rape.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

No its an excellent example. A woman can use a gun to stop a man from raping her. As for a man using a gun to rape a woman, most men wouldn't need a gun to rape a woman what part don't you understand?

A woman could also use a gun to rape a man.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[Hawkeye10]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

A woman could also use a gun to rape a man.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

I dont feel myself getting hard with a gun to my head.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I dont feel myself getting hard with a gun to my head.

The gun just has to get the guy to a state of immobility. And just because you wouldn't (or doubt you would) doesnt mean it isnt possible, especially for other men. She could give you viagra or there are other ways to get a man up. Hell she could simply insert things into you, still rape. You have another hole.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Do you have evidence that any of those teachers would have chosen to be armed and been able to take down the shooter without getting killed first?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Of course not. However, I imagine that every one of them would have armed herself if she had any premonition in advance that something like that was going to happen or could happen.

 

[VanceMack]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

The OP started a stupid thread on the premise that most prochoice people say that men have no right to discuss/be involved in the abortion debate, which is not a position held by most prochoice. What is being said is that abortion being legal or restricted naturally affects mainly/disproportionately the rights of women or those who can get pregnant (which at the moment is women) than any other recognized person. Hence women and their rights being the center of that discussion. When restricted, a woman has less rights to bodily autonomy than a man. The unborn has no recognized rights under our Constitution, and the rights of a man as a father only come into play once the child is born. A man doesnt get either visitation or have to pay child support until the baby is born. He can be excluded from the delivery room even. Even immediately after birth, until paternity is established, a man has no rights to the child.

Gender/sex have nothing to do with the gun debate. No single sex has their rights disproportionately affected by laws affecting guns, ownership, restrictions, limitations, or completely free and open carry and ownership. Every adult would have equal rights there to other adults.

They are not comparable.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Well...no...actually, abortion impacts the rights of the unborn children being slaughtered 'the most'...and that is the only reason why there is a debate. If it were simply a question of what a woman did to herself, that debate would be over in seconds.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Why, thank you <blush>

View attachment 67273916

great trigger discipline

 

[DebateChallenge]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Most rape victims know their rapists. It isnt someone holding them at gun point, but rather someone they are alone with who likely would know if they have a weapon on them which would be the only way it would be useful there.

I'm for carrying a gun or other weapon for defense, but it is stupid to assume women carrying a weapon could always prevent her rape. Hell, in many places where gun laws are very few and far between, women are still raped. You cant mandate a woman be armed at all times and even you did you cant force her to use it or use it well enough to prevent her rape.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

At least some of the rapes would be stopped if women carried firearms and became proficient with them. You're right that most of the time a rapist is known by their victims but still about one third of rapes are done by strangers. When a rapist knows their victim it can become trickier for the victim to use a gun to stop the rapist but when one third of rapes are done by strangers at least those rapes can be stopped if more women used and carried guns for personal protection. Even if we only reduce rapes by one third at least we're reducing it and although it would be best to eliminate it completely any amount of reduction is good if you ask me.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

A rapist has the initiative though...and any law granting her the right to a gun, give the rapist one too.

How allowing innocent women who want to protect themselves get guns also give guns to rapists?

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

They don't have a WOMB

So men cant have babies, but the can have the right to have babies.


Did you watch the video ?

Women should be allowed to kill babies because women have wombs? Does anybody here care for the little babies in all of this, or is abortion just about protecting the woman's right to commit murder if the victims of the murder present to her any discomfort or displeasure of any kind?

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Oh, I get it now. You have a problem with women. Here's your worst nightmare, check our her arsenal:

View attachment 67273926

Whatever shall we do when women insist on their right to get us to muster, one way or another?

 

[weaver2]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

In the abortion folder I started a thread that questioned whether or not men should be involved in the abortion debate since men don't get pregnant. I then compared that to the concept of whether or not women should be involved in the gun debate since the world of guns is mostly a man's world. Go to any gun shop, class, or shooting range and most of the people there will be men.

That has changed and its continuing to change as more and more women are getting into guns and within the last decade the number of women who own and use guns and are for gun rights has exploded. This makes sense since a gun will enable a woman to stop a much stronger man. So I will say this much, for the most part women should not be involved in the gun debate but I will make an exception for women who own and use guns and who are for gun rights. Somebody such as Kamala Harris should not be involved in the gun debate because even though she does own a gun herself for "personal safety" she is against other people having gun rights. So like Bloomberg she is a super hypocrite.

So in conclusion, should women such as Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren be involved in the gun debate? Absolutely not. Should Kaitlin Bennett and Carolyn D Meadows be involved in the gun debate? Absolutely. Women should not have a voice in the gun debate but there should be an exception for women who are for gun rights.

I'm sure this has already been said but it bears saying again. No intelligent person should be excluded from any important discussion. Intelligent men should not be dismissed from discussions on abortion. Intelligent women should not be dismissed from gun issues. Men who toss stupid stink bombs like "abortion is murder and women are murderers" into the discussion and women who toss their own dumb bombs like" gun don't kill people, people kill people" are not adding anything intelligent to a discussion and if you don't have anything intelligent to add you should be asked to keep your mouth shut.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Of course not. However, I imagine that every one of them would have armed herself if she had any premonition in advance that something like that was going to happen or could happen.

Golly, ya think? I'll bet if we all had premonitions we'd make sure we were never in the wrong place at the wrong time. You people.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I'm sure this has already been said but it bears saying again. No intelligent person should be excluded from any important discussion. Intelligent men should not be dismissed from discussions on abortion. Intelligent women should not be dismissed from gun issues. Men who toss stupid stink bombs like "abortion is murder and women are murderers" into the discussion and women who toss their own dumb bombs like" gun don't kill people, people kill people" are not adding anything intelligent to a discussion and if you don't have anything intelligent to add you should be asked to keep your mouth shut.

Has nothing to do with intelligence. It's biology. When men become able to bear children then they can dictate to women when and whether or not to get* and stay pregnant.

* the anti-abortion hypocrites are also doing everything they can to make contraception difficult (if not impossible for poor women) to get. So the evil they're pushing is two-fold.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

In the abortion folder I started a thread that questioned whether or not men should be involved in the abortion debate since men don't get pregnant. I then compared that to the concept of whether or not women should be involved in the gun debate since the world of guns is mostly a man's world. Go to any gun shop, class, or shooting range and most of the people there will be men.

That has changed and its continuing to change as more and more women are getting into guns and within the last decade the number of women who own and use guns and are for gun rights has exploded. This makes sense since a gun will enable a woman to stop a much stronger man. So I will say this much, for the most part women should not be involved in the gun debate but I will make an exception for women who own and use guns and who are for gun rights. Somebody such as Kamala Harris should not be involved in the gun debate because even though she does own a gun herself for "personal safety" she is against other people having gun rights. So like Bloomberg she is a super hypocrite.

So in conclusion, should women such as Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren be involved in the gun debate? Absolutely not. Should Kaitlin Bennett and Carolyn D Meadows be involved in the gun debate? Absolutely. Women should not have a voice in the gun debate but there should be an exception for women who are for gun rights.

When did the Constitution stop applying to women? Please explain your ridiculous views (which have been refuted before) within Constitutional criteria.

And I mean the 1A (freedom of speech, to protest, etc) and 2A...and the 15th, 19th, 26th (all about voting rights)...Please justify violating women's Const. rights regarding guns? Where else do we make "exceptions based on 'opinion?"

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Women should be allowed to kill babies because women have wombs? Does anybody here care for the little babies in all of this, or is abortion just about protecting the woman's right to commit murder if the victims of the murder present to her any discomfort or displeasure of any kind?

**** "little babies" rightwing BS. You people don't give a **** about "little babies." This is all about a religious cult that puts women beneath men. You sort have clearly shown time and time again that once those "little babies" born into poverty and violence you people couldn't care less what happens to them.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

At one point Dianne Feinstein was the only resident of her district to have a concealed carry permit, giving her a problem when she later advocated limiting 2nd amendment rights for other Americans.

I call BS...source it.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Not all women who own and use guns are necessarily for other people having gun rights, Kamila Harris for example.

And many women that dont own guns or shoot completely support the 2A. :roll:

 

[weaver2]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Women should be allowed to kill babies because women have wombs? Does anybody here care for the little babies in all of this, or is abortion just about protecting the woman's right to commit murder if the victims of the murder present to her any discomfort or displeasure of any kind?

Women get abortions because they know neither they or their family can take care of a child, give it the devoted attention it deserves and the security it needs. The human being that suffers is the child of a woman denied abortion when she knew she should not bring a new child into the world. The required birth you advocate is neither humane nor caring. The "little babies", those unplanned and unwanted children, that were forced into the world by anti-abortion men is abject and pitiable. .

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

At one point Dianne Feinstein was the only resident of her district to have a concealed carry permit, giving her a problem when she later advocated limiting 2nd amendment rights for other Americans.

Sometimes I actually almost admire how you people so shamelessly pump out pure BS like this. It must be liberating never feeling the need to back anything up.

 

[Sampson Simpson]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

In the abortion folder I started a thread that questioned whether or not men should be involved in the abortion debate since men don't get pregnant. I then compared that to the concept of whether or not women should be involved in the gun debate since the world of guns is mostly a man's world. Go to any gun shop, class, or shooting range and most of the people there will be men.

That has changed and its continuing to change as more and more women are getting into guns and within the last decade the number of women who own and use guns and are for gun rights has exploded. This makes sense since a gun will enable a woman to stop a much stronger man. So I will say this much, for the most part women should not be involved in the gun debate but I will make an exception for women who own and use guns and who are for gun rights. Somebody such as Kamala Harris should not be involved in the gun debate because even though she does own a gun herself for "personal safety" she is against other people having gun rights. So like Bloomberg she is a super hypocrite.

So in conclusion, should women such as Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren be involved in the gun debate? Absolutely not. Should Kaitlin Bennett and Carolyn D Meadows be involved in the gun debate? Absolutely. Women should not have a voice in the gun debate but there should be an exception for women who are for gun rights.

Man, the dumb that conservatives put out is ridiculous. Gun control and reproductive birth decisions have nothing to do with each other, and plenty of women have guns and shoot.

This is what its liek to be a conservatives, you have to make a fool of yourself putting forward complete nonsense, since you don't actually have facts, logic and reasoning

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

The she probably doesn't have immediate access to a gun


There is a British rapist called Peter Sutcliffe (AKA, the Yorkshire Ripper). He preyed mostly on prostitutes, his favored method was to hit women on the head with a hammer first...not much use of a gun there.

Nothing protects anyone from an ambush/surprise attack. Not even cops or soldiers. Yet they still carry guns because not all personal violence is an ambush and people still use guns successfully in self-defense.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Well...no...actually, abortion impacts the rights of the unborn children being slaughtered 'the most'...and that is the only reason why there is a debate. If it were simply a question of what a woman did to herself, that debate would be over in seconds.

Dont lie...the unborn have no rights. Your bumper sticker fails again.

Now you are gushing emotions all over a gun thread...get it together.