He is right about the logic..they are both bad ideas...
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Forget rifles, we have to ban hammers !
- Thread starter dogtowner
- Start date
Werbung:
I'm not blamming Chicago..their just easy to pick on...
My daughters husband had a real fear of guns, that is until he joined my family..both my adopted son and my daughter made the US Olympic team years ago..
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
Well, I guess attitude towards guns are a cultural thing. My parents and three brothers never had a gun. However, I did have a Red Ryder BB gun, just like the one in "A Christmas Story", but I shot targets, and no living things, unlike my peers.
TheJPRD
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 417
Lagboltz: I am deeply sorry that my satire and irony has caused you to become "impatient" with me. Far be it from me to purposefully create impatience in a fellow poster. I feel like such a nasty beast.
I must question your use of the term "playground taunting". Nothing I've said has been remotely similar to a "Nah nah nah nah nah, your mother wears combat boots"! That was an example of "playground taunting" by the way.The post which caused your impatience addressed a perfectly logical example of how to solve problems if one is allowed to spend billions of dollars and violate our Constitutional rights! You've never participated in a classic debate have you? If you had, you'd be aware that the debating tactic I used is one that's often used and is accepted in classical debate. I simply took the logic expressed by my leftist opponents when they "debate" gun-deaths, obesity, and global warming, and applied it to three different problems. If you're really getting into debating now, explain to us why such logic is WISE when you and other leftists apply it to issues, but is just "playground taunting" when we Conservatives use it to solve problems you don't want solved????
My suggestion indirectly addresses another issue also, that of the leftwing's use of anti-conservative demogogues. Allow me to explain. I am absolutely certain that you are strongly opposed to rape! I am reasonably certain that you're in favor of birth-control as a means of controlling population growth. I didn't attack your motives for opposing my suggestion. I did not say that you are "pro-rape" or "pro-abortion". I have noticed, however, that when we Conservatives express our opinions that gun-control strips citizens of their right to self-defense, and that food dictatorship forces us to put foods in our bodies that we don't want in them, we're accused of causing gun-deaths and obesity. If Conservatives used leftist tactics, we'd accuse those who oppose the suggestion I made as being "pro-rape" and "pro-abortion.
If you didn't like my suggestion and the logic I used to support it, explain to us why the same logic is ok with you when applied by the left to gun-control, food dictatorship, and global-warming. Also explain to us why our Conservative positions are legitimate targets for demogogues, whereas leftwing Democrat positions are not! I sincerely pray that this post hasn't caused you further impatience.
I think we all had a red rider...brings back memories..
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Glad you recognize that. But i wouldn't have insulted your intelligence and sense of fairness by even thinking that you could be the mindless bully type, interested in "easy picking.
This just proves how wrong I can get!
I guess you had me all wrong..I'm just a big- ole bully..and you think you don't pick on the easy/ idiot side of conservative thinking..There I said it there are some idiots out there..but even most of the idiots have common sense..
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Logic of the Right....
Lets pretend that Hammers are the same as a ar-15 with a 30 or larger round clip.
How many school mass blunt object attacks are there? I never see...20 killed in attack with rock at X school or mall now do we.
Guns don't kill people...People kill People...OK lets not have the army have guns...since they are not needed.
Lets Pretend that chicago has a high murder rate because of gun laws..But lets Ignore that most places with gun control actuly have lower rates..
UK: 63,047,162 people
Chicago: 26,955,98
UK had 58....vs chicagos over 500....
Chicago is not the normal result of gun control...rather its high gun deaths is a reason for its Gun control mesures. Not the other way around.
Just think though if chicago put as much time into going after guns as they do Pot and other stupid stuff...Fill the cells with gun owners who did not have permits...great way to clean up the streets. OF course the NRA would get its panties in a bunch and cry like a school girl....so they don't.
This posts talks about Rifles...not guns...So is your point to let people have assult rifles but ban hand guns?
NRA nut jobs want armed gaurds evryplace with people now....same idiots also fear this police state they will have to fight with there pea shooter army against our real one.....
about 125,000 schools
47,000 malls
over 6,000 movie theaters...
lets say a cheap ass rent a cop gets paid 30,000 a year...and each only takes one. Plus Health and other benifits of 5,000.
cost is 6,230,000,000
of course we know that you would need at least 2 gaurds...so you can double that ...
All so you can live in a nation that needs armed gaurds evry 500 .....And you can just keep pretending we are the greatest nation on earth...even though no other nation you would ever want to live in needs that.
But you need a gun to be safe....
a woman is found dead in her house...gun shots heard that night....and she has been shot and killed..who did it it?
A: the Husband/boyfreind
B:Suicide/accident
C:Random Stranger
Please tell me what you think is the most likey...I will give you a hint...its not 3.
Lets pretend that Hammers are the same as a ar-15 with a 30 or larger round clip.
How many school mass blunt object attacks are there? I never see...20 killed in attack with rock at X school or mall now do we.
Guns don't kill people...People kill People...OK lets not have the army have guns...since they are not needed.
Lets Pretend that chicago has a high murder rate because of gun laws..But lets Ignore that most places with gun control actuly have lower rates..
UK: 63,047,162 people
Chicago: 26,955,98
UK had 58....vs chicagos over 500....
Chicago is not the normal result of gun control...rather its high gun deaths is a reason for its Gun control mesures. Not the other way around.
Just think though if chicago put as much time into going after guns as they do Pot and other stupid stuff...Fill the cells with gun owners who did not have permits...great way to clean up the streets. OF course the NRA would get its panties in a bunch and cry like a school girl....so they don't.
This posts talks about Rifles...not guns...So is your point to let people have assult rifles but ban hand guns?
NRA nut jobs want armed gaurds evryplace with people now....same idiots also fear this police state they will have to fight with there pea shooter army against our real one.....
about 125,000 schools
47,000 malls
over 6,000 movie theaters...
lets say a cheap ass rent a cop gets paid 30,000 a year...and each only takes one. Plus Health and other benifits of 5,000.
cost is 6,230,000,000
of course we know that you would need at least 2 gaurds...so you can double that ...
All so you can live in a nation that needs armed gaurds evry 500 .....And you can just keep pretending we are the greatest nation on earth...even though no other nation you would ever want to live in needs that.
But you need a gun to be safe....
a woman is found dead in her house...gun shots heard that night....and she has been shot and killed..who did it it?
A: the Husband/boyfreind
B:Suicide/accident
C:Random Stranger
Please tell me what you think is the most likey...I will give you a hint...its not 3.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Dead link..no way you read any of my post..I really never thought you would..
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
read the link once lol
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
The three points you brought up were quite divergent, where only one of them (guns) had been in any prior discussion. To slog through abortion and global warming at the usual pace of this forum along with the taunt in your final paragraph was reason for me to ignore it.Lagboltz: I am deeply sorry that my satire and irony has caused you to become "impatient" with me. Far be it from me to purposefully create impatience in a fellow poster. I feel like such a nasty beast.
The post which caused your impatience addressed a perfectly logical example of how to solve problems if one is allowed to spend billions of dollars and violate our Constitutional rights! You've never participated in a classic debate have you? If you had, you'd be aware that the debating tactic I used is one that's often used and is accepted in classical debate. I simply took the logic expressed by my leftist opponents when they "debate" gun-deaths, obesity, and global warming, and applied it to three different problems. If you're really getting into debating now, explain to us why such logic is WISE when you and other leftists apply it to issues, but is just "playground taunting" when we Conservatives use it to solve problems you don't want solved????
My suggestion indirectly addresses another issue also, that of the leftwing's use of anti-conservative demogogues. Allow me to explain. I am absolutely certain that you are strongly opposed to rape! I am reasonably certain that you're in favor of birth-control as a means of controlling population growth. I didn't attack your motives for opposing my suggestion. I did not say that you are "pro-rape" or "pro-abortion". I have noticed, however, that when we Conservatives express our opinions that gun-control strips citizens of their right to self-defense, and that food dictatorship forces us to put foods in our bodies that we don't want in them, we're accused of causing gun-deaths and obesity. If Conservatives used leftist tactics, we'd accuse those who oppose the suggestion I made as being "pro-rape" and "pro-abortion.
If you didn't like my suggestion and the logic I used to support it, explain to us why the same logic is ok with you when applied by the left to gun-control, food dictatorship, and global-warming. Also explain to us why our Conservative positions are legitimate targets for demogogues, whereas leftwing Democrat positions are not! I sincerely pray that this post hasn't caused you further impatience.
I consider it playground taunting when I go through a post where 60% of it is a silly reductio ad absurdum and ends with "NOW, wait for the leftwing cries of "Un-Constitutional"!
". If your reductio ad absurdum had a small bit of elegance or finesse I would have considered it more seriously. And yes, I once took a course that covered most techniques of informal logic.
Werbung:
TheJPRD
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 417
^ Am I right or wrong that many liberals support what they see as a "Right To Die"? If I'm correct about that, I'm surprised liberals are so heartless when it comes to allowing folks a gun in order to take their lives more quickly and more easily. By denying such folks a firearm, liberals are forcing those citizens to take their lives by cutting their throats with a knife or hitting themselves over the head with a hammer??? That's intellectually inconsistent, and it seems very cruel to me.
Similar threads
