If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   State of NY to legal firearms owners, "Register your weapons, it's the law." Legal firearms owners to the State of NY, "Guns? I don't own any guns, and you can't prove it so go fark yourselves"   (nypost.com) divider line 1301
    More: Hero, New York, civil disobedience, Association of Baptist Churches in Ireland  
•       •       •

17845 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jan 2013 at 4:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1301 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-26 08:26:56 PM

Wayne 985: Telling your cult to murder people is restricted by law. Funny that.


Please register that comment for approval.
 
2013-01-26 08:27:28 PM

LavenderWolf: djh0101010: BronyMedic: justtray: Way to miss the point. Bravo.

I can see you're a mental lost cause, so I won't be humoring your dishonest arguments and willful ignorance anymore.

You've been rude and condescending, and acting as a pseudo-intellectual superior towards people who disagree with you this entire thread. You have no right to be offended that people would treat you with the same attitude because of it.

Wow, BronyMedic is attacking someone else for being rude and condescending?

That's remarkable. hey Brony, how about you address the topic at hand, rather than just post your usual personal insults?

Short list since your attention span is short: How do you propose to get the criminals to obey the laws you propose? What with them being, you know, criminals and all?

The idea is that once the legal firearms are easily accounted for, tracking the unlawful sale and use of firearms becomes much, much easier.


How exactly does registering legal guns 1 - 100 help you track the illegal guns 101 - 200??
 
2013-01-26 08:27:39 PM

GoldSpider: LavenderWolf: There are plenty of cases where a gun registry has NOT led to the confiscation of guns, and you damned well know it.

"There's a good chance this won't be abused by the authorities" isn't a very strong pretext for enacting such a law.


It's not even a 'good chance', it's not like they haven't abused laws before. Even if the current government won't, what about later on? The government is constantly changing, we should be very careful about granting them new powers or creating new agencies.
 
2013-01-26 08:27:43 PM

xynix: vpb: This is one of the more amusing arguments gun nuts make.  If M-16s weren't more effective than bold action rifles, especially at close range, the DoD wouldn't have gone to the expense of buying them would it?  This argument has been shot down many times before.

Yet another idiotic comment.. congrats to making it to level 5. My M&P 15-22 uses a .22lr round. A person could be shot 5-10 times and still survive the encounter with that gun. My .45 is chambered and the barrel is rifled (i know because I rifled it) for hydroshock bullets which will put a hole the size of a grapefruit in a person. That person will be lucky if they survive one round and certainly not two in an intense situation. If I had time to aim they won't last a single round.. the M&P is much harder to aim and the target would have opportunity to shoot back regardless. So proposing the banning of the M&P assault rifle accomplishes absolutely nothing because the 10 rounds in the .45 would be much more devastating.

This is what happens when you have someone that knows nothing about guns talking about gun control. And M16 is perfectly legal to own if you want to go through the lengthy and expensive process of owning it. It will cost about $4000 and it will take about 6 months to make happen but it can be done. What person who is intent on doing a mass shooting will go through that process? You have no business talking about gun control because you have no knowledge at all of guns.

This is what is frustrating to gun owners.. People like you that are clueless when it comes to such things discussing them like you actually know what you're talking about.


It's like Michelle Bachmann being on the Science Committee.
 
2013-01-26 08:27:59 PM

fredklein: LavenderWolf: truthseeker2083: I don't have any guns, but when people are anti-gun/pro gun control, you aren't helping anything with the bs name calling. Saying 'gun nuts', or saying guns are replacements for small dangly bits, or any of those childish things just push people away from your side. I see gun owners explain how things work much better than I've seen gun control advocates explain their side. Due to the sheer immaturity and childlike name calling, you are hurting your argument. So much so, that while I used to be 'meh' on guns, I'm now leaning towards the gun owner's point of view. It may start with 'oh just register your gun, nothing will happen', but when governments want to crack down further, it'll just be that much easier. Right now it's just registration, what will it be tomorrow?

The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.

No. The slippery slope is only a fallacy if you cannot show the links from A to Z. If you can show the links, it is not a fallacy.

History provides plenty of examples where registration had led to confiscation. Does this absolutely prove it will this time? No. But it makes it a very real and reasonable possibility- one to be avoided.


In which democracy did that happen, historically?

I mean that is your argument right?
 
2013-01-26 08:28:34 PM

jehovahs witness protection: muck4doo: AssAsInAssassin: Fark It: If there's one constant in the gun control debate it's that the people who support bans and confiscation will always, without fail, overreach.

If there's one constant about gun nuts, it's that their over-reaching zeal enables lunatics to go on killing sprees. Then they blame everyone but the over-reaching gun nuts who defiled the 2nd Amendment and turned "a well regulated militia" into a mob of paranoid fanatics with delusions of persecution.

Go fark yourself. You are personally to blame for Newtown. You and all your verminous ilk who insist the Constitution says something it clearly does not say.

I blame you for cancer, so there!

The number of times ASS appears in his name is appropriate.


I don't like you, either. Does that make you feel bad? 'Cause I couldn't care less what some asshole thinks about me.
 
2013-01-26 08:28:37 PM
NRA: Law enforcement needs to enforce laws....oh...except those laws.
 
2013-01-26 08:29:22 PM

LavenderWolf: There are plenty of cases where a gun registry has NOT led to the confiscation of guns, and you damned well know it.



So why not write in a provision that protects against this registry against being used for confiscation? After all, if nobody is going to do it, it won't make a difference, right?

Unprotected, all a registry does is leave a huge loophole for the real gun-grabbers to enforce a retroactive ban immediately after signing it into law, and make criminals out of formerly law abiding citizens. Sure, the current round of politicians might not use it for that purpose, but what about the next? And the next? And so on in perpetuity until the law is either struck down or amended to protect grandfathered guns that might be banned in the future.
 
2013-01-26 08:29:28 PM

fredklein: ... Law abiding gun owners don't commit crimes...


Until they do. The guy who makes a straw purchase bought his gun legally. Most people who break the law are not career criminals.

I know people like yourself seem to have a fantasy of white knights versus scoundrels, but reality is a little more nuanced.
 
2013-01-26 08:29:51 PM

fredklein: How exactly does registering legal guns 1 - 100 help you track the illegal guns 101 - 200??


While I'm a little supportive of CERTAIN populations which own guns, such as those that house mentally ill in the same area they store firearms, having to register them, mass registration of existing, owned guns is about useless. Serial numbers take all but a minute and a metal file that costs 10 bucks at ACE Hardware to remove, and the rifling in a barrel can easily be destroyed after it's used, rendering forensic markings useless. Even newer guns that use tamper-resistant serial numbers and barcoding can be anonymized in a matter of minutes.
 
2013-01-26 08:30:07 PM

truthseeker2083: I didn't say anything worse would happen, merely that I'm uncomfortable about opening that door. I know what the government did once it had the Patriot act, I only shudder to think of what will happen if we give them power over more of our rights.


Will I need to register every one of my rights in order to use them? Where's the form to register my 1st, 4th, & 5th Amendments? I'll get to those other ones later...
 
2013-01-26 08:30:33 PM

Chariset: Fark It: If there's one constant in the gun control debate it's that the people who support bans and confiscation will always, without fail, overreach.

Sure.  What's a school full of dead children compared to your personal momentary inconvenience?


It's a school full now ?
 
2013-01-26 08:30:46 PM

Slappajo: LavenderWolf: craig328: Law-biding gun owners can say "Yep, I do have guns. You knew that; here they are, safely within my possession." The police can say "Well, the weapon used was registered to X person; check out that person to see if the gun was stolen, sold without transferring the ownership, etc." or "Well, the gun used was unregistered. Now we need to find out where these unregistered guns are coming from." Though the process would take time, the goal is to keep guns out of the hands of those who would use them unlawfully.

Yes, believe it or not, but sometimes people do things (such as supporting gun control measures like a registration requirement) without having an overarching goal of disarming you and doing bad things to you in your disarmed state.

Scenario to get your take on...

Let's assume you live in an apartment building. Someone in your apartment building gets shot. Can the cops look in a database to see who has guns in that building and then use that information as reasonable suspicion or probable cause to get a warrant to search all of those people's apartments simply because they own guns?


No.

Why would a gun registry suddenly increase the police's power manifold? Why would a gun registry completely change the rules on how and why warrants are issued?
 
2013-01-26 08:31:04 PM

muck4doo: PsiChick: muck4doo: PsiChick: muck4doo: PsiChick: Okay. Can you please explain to me WHAT THE FARK YOU'RE DISAGREEING ABOUT? I don't like the law, dipshiat! FFS, not everyone is your farking enemy.

You register this post yet? I can't comment back on it till you do.

/OK. Maybe I misunderstood you original post. :)

Lol, my Boobies was just pointing out that 'FU' isn't an actual protest, it's a temper tantrum. Lawsuits, in this case, work better.

/What did you  think I said?

Looked to me like you were saying you didn't have a problem with making people register their arms.

No, I was saying that the law is functionally obnoxious but nothing else (although, since it's totally unsupportable and paves the way for illegal behavior on the part of officials, is deserving of a smackdown). My original post was just saying 'FU != protest'. I had to clarify because I went off on a tangent and forgot to rewrite it.

Ah. Got it. My apologies then. You may still have to register this comment though.


Lol, it's fine. And sure...just lemme talk to a lawyer...:p
 
2013-01-26 08:31:51 PM

Wayne 985: fredklein: ... Law abiding gun owners don't commit crimes...

Until they do. The guy who makes a straw purchase bought his gun legally. Most people who break the law are not career criminals.

I know people like yourself seem to have a fantasy of white knights versus scoundrels, but reality is a little more nuanced.


Future possible criminals! This is what authoritarian asshats look like. I'm glad you douches are all making yourselves obvious.
 
2013-01-26 08:31:53 PM
Abstinence only education
It doesn't work, do away with it

War on drugs
It doesn't work, do away with it

Killing terrorists
It doesn't work, do away with it

Guns
WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING
 
2013-01-26 08:31:59 PM

Wayne 985: fredklein: ... Law abiding gun owners don't commit crimes...

Until they do. The guy who makes a straw purchase bought his gun legally. Most people who break the law are not career criminals.

I know people like yourself seem to have a fantasy of white knights versus scoundrels, but reality is a little more nuanced.


Actually, by definition straw purchases are an illegal act. It's buying a gun for someone who is not legally allowed to do so.
 
2013-01-26 08:33:09 PM

Maximer: truthseeker2083: I didn't say anything worse would happen, merely that I'm uncomfortable about opening that door. I know what the government did once it had the Patriot act, I only shudder to think of what will happen if we give them power over more of our rights.

Will I need to register every one of my rights in order to use them? Where's the form to register my 1st, 4th, & 5th Amendments? I'll get to those other ones later...


Well stated.
 
2013-01-26 08:34:26 PM

Frank N Stein: Abstinence only education
It doesn't work, do away with it

War on drugs
It doesn't work, do away with it

Killing terrorists
It doesn't work, do away with it

Guns
WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING


I think that pretty much says it all about the right-wing mindset, doesn't it?
 
2013-01-26 08:34:39 PM

justtray: muck4doo: justtray: Anyway, welcome to ignore.

Oh lookie who just started their "inferior" list

The funny part is you're not even worthy enough to be on it. You offer too much ignorant humor to be ignored. I keep you around for entertainment purposes only.


See. He only puts people he loses arguments to on ignore. Step up your game bro :P
 
2013-01-26 08:34:59 PM

vpb: Amos Quito:

End the Drug War and most gun-related crimes will disappear.

Yes, all of those school shootings are committed by drug dealers.


I hope you never breed
 
2013-01-26 08:35:04 PM

justtray: In which democracy did that happen, historically?

I mean that is your argument right?


Germany, Spain, Italy, Japan... to name the big ones. And, it may be argued that Russia's democratic government is in the process of be usurped. Of course, there are many more examples of firearm registration followed by confiscation in other countries that were not democratic to begin with.

I don't think the fact that we have a representative republic somehow evolves our leaders to a level that they will not fall into the same acts of tyrannies that have been perpetuated by governments throughout human existence. If you truly believe that our species has evolved that greatly within the last 100 years then I think you should reread the history books again.
 
2013-01-26 08:36:18 PM

al's hat: Actually, by definition straw purchases are an illegal act. It's buying a gun for someone who is not legally allowed to do so.


Prove it. Prove I bought this pistol for my buddy lenny who just got out of jail for rape. I just wanted to own a pistol that had some sweet polymer frame lines. What Lenny does with his money is his own business. I don't know why he had 760 dollars.

Or, rather. Hey. I reported that gun stolen the MOMENT I saw it missing. I never knew Lenny took it from me. Now, it wasn't a Straw Purchase, because you can't prove any of that cold, hard cash changed hands.

Proving a Straw Purchase is like proving you were fired for your religion. It requires a complete idiot.
 
2013-01-26 08:36:33 PM

al's hat: LavenderWolf: djh0101010: BronyMedic: justtray: Way to miss the point. Bravo.

I can see you're a mental lost cause, so I won't be humoring your dishonest arguments and willful ignorance anymore.

You've been rude and condescending, and acting as a pseudo-intellectual superior towards people who disagree with you this entire thread. You have no right to be offended that people would treat you with the same attitude because of it.

Wow, BronyMedic is attacking someone else for being rude and condescending?

That's remarkable. hey Brony, how about you address the topic at hand, rather than just post your usual personal insults?

Short list since your attention span is short: How do you propose to get the criminals to obey the laws you propose? What with them being, you know, criminals and all?

The idea is that once the legal firearms are easily accounted for, tracking the unlawful sale and use of firearms becomes much, much easier.

Just like tracking the sale of illegal drugs is so much easier because legal drugs are prescribed?


Little bit different. Anybody with a chemistry set can produce street drugs. You aren't going to make Viagra in your basement, but you can make meth, speed, LSD, crack, krokodil, etc.

Guns are harder to manufacture than street drugs. You might be able to make a pop gun, maybe even something with multiple shots, but you aren't going to make an MP5 out of raw materials.

You literally could not have chosen a worse comparison.
 
2013-01-26 08:36:36 PM

LavenderWolf: The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.


Wrong.

It can be =/= IS

In this case, it is not a fallacy.

Our very founders noted that, historically, the first step in tyranny is limiting power of the people. That much is true, and is applicable today in 3rd world countries still. But even in the discussions of the times of the US in it's infancy, it's mentioned directly, that to be unable to defend one's self is practically inviting ne'er do wells to accost you.

Scale is irrelevant, be it a bandit, a foreign nation, or a domestic threat(to include a government gone bad).

His argument is not that it's inevitable, only that it is one less safeguard the people have against such things, and there is real historical(even modern) precedence for such worry.
 
2013-01-26 08:37:17 PM

Frank N Stein: Abstinence only education
It doesn't work, do away with it

War on drugs
It doesn't work, do away with it

Killing terrorists
It doesn't work, do away with it

Guns
WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING


Soooo... their failure to acknowledge other acts injustice makes their current desire to highlight and injustice invalid? Please, tell me how this works again?
 
2013-01-26 08:37:21 PM

truthseeker2083: I don't have any guns, but when people are anti-gun/pro gun control, you aren't helping anything with the bs name calling. Saying 'gun nuts', or saying guns are replacements for small dangly bits, or any of those childish things just push people away from your side. I see gun owners explain how things work much better than I've seen gun control advocates explain their side. Due to the sheer immaturity and childlike name calling, you are hurting your argument. So much so, that while I used to be 'meh' on guns, I'm now leaning towards the gun owner's point of view. It may start with 'oh just register your gun, nothing will happen', but when governments want to crack down further, it'll just be that much easier. Right now it's just registration, what will it be tomorrow?


+1
 
2013-01-26 08:39:00 PM

Gdalescrboz: LavenderWolf SmartestFunniest 2013-01-26 07:58:39 PM


Gdalescrboz: LavenderWolf: pedrop357: LavenderWolf: Yes, those big gun grabs in the US. Now no Americans have guns.

So it only counts if they go big? Smaller actual events, and larger proposals don't count?

So issues of scale mean nothing in your world?

Slavery wasn't a big deal either because only a very small number of people owned slaves. That's your logic at work, you farking schmuck

No, retard, the point wasn't "Well it's small scale, so not a big deal."

It was "Okay, you might have taken guns from a few people, but good farking luck on a 'big gun grab' the far-right is constantly worried about."

Issues of scale. Not an issue of whether something is a "big deal" or not.

Hey no problem, i can argue that retarded claim as well. Slavery is extremely small in proportion. The estimate is between 12 and 27 million people are enslaved in the world, CURRENTLY. Taking the high estimate, only .0038% of the people on Earth, .0017% on the low end. Guess we can move along, thanks for putting our minds at ease with your "scale" argument Lavender, you dumbass


Man, what is wrong with your brain? Are you just choosing not to comprehend?

Let me spell it out for you.

TRYING TO TAKE THE GUNS AWAY FROM AMERICANS LIKE THE RIGHT WING IS CONSTANTLY AFRAID OF IS PATENTLY ABSURD. IT WOULD RESULT IN THE DEATHS OF THOUSANDS, OR IF YOU'RE A PESSIMIST, MILLIONS.

Do you understand yet?
 
2013-01-26 08:39:07 PM

Maximer: truthseeker2083: I didn't say anything worse would happen, merely that I'm uncomfortable about opening that door. I know what the government did once it had the Patriot act, I only shudder to think of what will happen if we give them power over more of our rights.

Will I need to register every one of my rights in order to use them? Where's the form to register my 1st, 4th, & 5th Amendments? I'll get to those other ones later...


According to some in this thread, that would be acceptable. I'll keep my rights free of registration... as long as I can.
 
2013-01-26 08:39:25 PM

justtray: fredklein: LavenderWolf: truthseeker2083: I don't have any guns, but when people are anti-gun/pro gun control, you aren't helping anything with the bs name calling. Saying 'gun nuts', or saying guns are replacements for small dangly bits, or any of those childish things just push people away from your side. I see gun owners explain how things work much better than I've seen gun control advocates explain their side. Due to the sheer immaturity and childlike name calling, you are hurting your argument. So much so, that while I used to be 'meh' on guns, I'm now leaning towards the gun owner's point of view. It may start with 'oh just register your gun, nothing will happen', but when governments want to crack down further, it'll just be that much easier. Right now it's just registration, what will it be tomorrow?

The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.

No. The slippery slope is only a fallacy if you cannot show the links from A to Z. If you can show the links, it is not a fallacy.

History provides plenty of examples where registration had led to confiscation. Does this absolutely prove it will this time? No. But it makes it a very real and reasonable possibility- one to be avoided.

In which democracy did that happen, historically?

I mean that is your argument right?


If I recall correctly California had people register their SKSs, then banned them a while later, conviently using the registration lists to know who to visit.
 
2013-01-26 08:39:32 PM

justtray: fredklein: LavenderWolf: truthseeker2083: I don't have any guns, but when people are anti-gun/pro gun control, you aren't helping anything with the bs name calling. Saying 'gun nuts', or saying guns are replacements for small dangly bits, or any of those childish things just push people away from your side. I see gun owners explain how things work much better than I've seen gun control advocates explain their side. Due to the sheer immaturity and childlike name calling, you are hurting your argument. So much so, that while I used to be 'meh' on guns, I'm now leaning towards the gun owner's point of view. It may start with 'oh just register your gun, nothing will happen', but when governments want to crack down further, it'll just be that much easier. Right now it's just registration, what will it be tomorrow?

The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.

No. The slippery slope is only a fallacy if you cannot show the links from A to Z. If you can show the links, it is not a fallacy.

History provides plenty of examples where registration had led to confiscation. Does this absolutely prove it will this time? No. But it makes it a very real and reasonable possibility- one to be avoided.

In which democracy did that happen, historically?

I mean that is your argument right?


Do you pride yourself in being ignorant?
 
2013-01-26 08:39:49 PM

BronyMedic: al's hat: Actually, by definition straw purchases are an illegal act. It's buying a gun for someone who is not legally allowed to do so.

Prove it. Prove I bought this pistol for my buddy lenny who just got out of jail for rape. I just wanted to own a pistol that had some sweet polymer frame lines. What Lenny does with his money is his own business. I don't know why he had 760 dollars.

Or, rather. Hey. I reported that gun stolen the MOMENT I saw it missing. I never knew Lenny took it from me. Now, it wasn't a Straw Purchase, because you can't prove any of that cold, hard cash changed hands.

Proving a Straw Purchase is like proving you were fired for your religion. It requires a complete idiot.


I'm not trying to prove shiat but if you buy a gun for someone who isn't legally allowed to own that is a straw purchase. Proving stuff is for prosecutors...I'm a realist which means what is true is often different from what can be proven.
 
2013-01-26 08:40:05 PM

Giltric: justtray: muck4doo: justtray: Anyway, welcome to ignore.

Oh lookie who just started their "inferior" list

The funny part is you're not even worthy enough to be on it. You offer too much ignorant humor to be ignored. I keep you around for entertainment purposes only.

See. He only puts people he loses arguments to on ignore. Step up your game bro :P


I'm not even going to try to compete with that kind of derp.
 
2013-01-26 08:40:15 PM

omeganuepsilon: LavenderWolf: The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.

Wrong.

It can be =/= IS

In this case, it is not a fallacy.

Our very founders noted that, historically, the first step in tyranny is limiting power of the people. That much is true, and is applicable today in 3rd world countries still. But even in the discussions of the times of the US in it's infancy, it's mentioned directly, that to be unable to defend one's self is practically inviting ne'er do wells to accost you.

Scale is irrelevant, be it a bandit, a foreign nation, or a domestic threat(to include a government gone bad).

His argument is not that it's inevitable, only that it is one less safeguard the people have against such things, and there is real historical(even modern) precedence for such worry.


Thank you. Much better than I could have put it.
 
2013-01-26 08:40:23 PM
I've learned from this thread that there are some liberals who actually believe in protecting rights and are able to carry on a logical conversation, but a large percentage REFUSES to reason with others and is DETERMINED to control people. What you have shown tonight is that you are borderline insane. Fortunately "you people" are anti gun and aren't a real danger to others.

/you know who you are
 
2013-01-26 08:40:30 PM

DownTheRabbitHole: truthseeker2083: I don't have any guns, but when people are anti-gun/pro gun control, you aren't helping anything with the bs name calling. Saying 'gun nuts', or saying guns are replacements for small dangly bits, or any of those childish things just push people away from your side. I see gun owners explain how things work much better than I've seen gun control advocates explain their side. Due to the sheer immaturity and childlike name calling, you are hurting your argument. So much so, that while I used to be 'meh' on guns, I'm now leaning towards the gun owner's point of view. It may start with 'oh just register your gun, nothing will happen', but when governments want to crack down further, it'll just be that much easier. Right now it's just registration, what will it be tomorrow?

+1


Every gun in Switzerland is registered. Armed citizenry and gun registration are good things.
 
2013-01-26 08:40:57 PM

give me doughnuts: It's like Michelle Bachmann being on the Science Committee.


Totally using that
 
2013-01-26 08:42:04 PM

truthseeker2083: Maximer: truthseeker2083: I didn't say anything worse would happen, merely that I'm uncomfortable about opening that door. I know what the government did once it had the Patriot act, I only shudder to think of what will happen if we give them power over more of our rights.

Will I need to register every one of my rights in order to use them? Where's the form to register my 1st, 4th, & 5th Amendments? I'll get to those other ones later...

According to some in this thread, that would be acceptable. I'll keep my rights free of registration... as long as I can.


The face that you would not like to have these dangerous rights controlled and registered by the government scares me? Why would you really need the right against unlawful search or seizures... or not to self incriminate? I mean, if you didn't do anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about.

These "rights nuts" are always going on about freedom and liberty. It's insane. The government are the people and of course they would never do anything that may not be in the best interest of the people...
 
2013-01-26 08:42:22 PM

BronyMedic: justtray: Anyway, welcome to ignore.

And nothing of value was lost.

djh0101010: Wow, BronyMedic is attacking someone else for being rude and condescending?

That's remarkable. hey Brony, how about you address the topic at hand, rather than just post your usual personal insults?

Oh, hi. I see you're still trying to troll while not reading anything I've posted. Good for you. Maybe you can regale us about more tales of how you're such a martyr for humanity like last night.

djh0101010: Short list since your attention span is short: How do you propose to get the criminals to obey the laws you propose? What with them being, you know, criminals and all?

My, my. You're entirely disingenuous tonight. You're even arguing me after I'm (quite actually) agreeing with you in this thread. It's obvious you just get pissed off THAT MUCH by my continued existence on FARK. I'm proud of that.

The whole point of laws is to ensure that society is protected and justice is served after the crime is committed. The fact that a law is on the books is no guarantee, in and of itself of deterrence of ANY crime, involving a gun or not.

It's almost as if Crime is a complex, multifactorial phenomenon in our society, and you're just tying to grossly oversimply the root causes and motivations because you perceive someone is coming to get your guns.


Wow, patronize much? BronyMedic, the ONLY thing we have in common is a decade or two of NREMT licensure. To be honest, it offends me when you pretend to speak for me as another licensed emergency medical responder. You don't actually get any sort of authority to speak for every EMT ever, just because you have a license.

That said - not once, have you ever stated any kind of post where you show that you understand that criminals are bad people, and the 99.999% of gun owners in this country, are not bad people.

I understand that you work in NYC or some other shiathole. I'm fine with that. I just ask that you would pull your head out of your geocentric ass, and understand that 99.999% of people neither live in your district, nor do we share your criminals' proclivity towards crime.

I'm sure it's strange and implausible for you to imagine and understand, but, in civilized parts of the country/world, where you don't live, gun owners outnumber criminals 1,000 to one or more. As your only point of view is limited to a huge urban environment, you have a distorted view.

Here in the real world, 9999 out of 10,0000 gun owners, are law abiding citizens who only threaten the bad guys.

Read that again, BronyMedic.

And again please.

Great, thanks. Now, please think about why those of us who are not criminals, feel threatened and offended, by people like you who want to take away our rights to bear arms. We haven't committed any crime, and we need our guns to protect ourselves from the actual criminals, yet, your type would take the guns away from the law abiding people, making us helpless against the criminals who ignore the laws.
 
2013-01-26 08:42:36 PM

The Southern Dandy: Every gun in Switzerland is registered. Armed citizenry and gun registration are good things.


Every person in Switzerland is required to serve a term in the Swiss Army at 18 as well, and there is a major cultural, mental/healthcare support, and socioeconomic difference as well.

Please don't try to distill the lack of gun violence in Switzerland down to global gun registration.
 
2013-01-26 08:42:41 PM

pedrop357: cameroncrazy1984: That's why I refuse to register my car. It only makes it easier for the government to take it. For some reason. I guess.

Have the people pushing for car registration ever pushed for outright bans and confiscations on cars?

have governments ever used registration lists to demand that legally owned be turned over because they're no longer legal due to a change in the law and/or an attorney general issued an opinion invalidating a prior one?

No? Then Shut The fark Up.


What if a new law passed that required modification to your car and making expensive parts useless?

Ohhh.. you do not know much about guns, if anything at all. Thanks for playing, though.
 
2013-01-26 08:43:23 PM

fredklein: justtray: fredklein: LavenderWolf: truthseeker2083: I don't have any guns, but when people are anti-gun/pro gun control, you aren't helping anything with the bs name calling. Saying 'gun nuts', or saying guns are replacements for small dangly bits, or any of those childish things just push people away from your side. I see gun owners explain how things work much better than I've seen gun control advocates explain their side. Due to the sheer immaturity and childlike name calling, you are hurting your argument. So much so, that while I used to be 'meh' on guns, I'm now leaning towards the gun owner's point of view. It may start with 'oh just register your gun, nothing will happen', but when governments want to crack down further, it'll just be that much easier. Right now it's just registration, what will it be tomorrow?

The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.

No. The slippery slope is only a fallacy if you cannot show the links from A to Z. If you can show the links, it is not a fallacy.

History provides plenty of examples where registration had led to confiscation. Does this absolutely prove it will this time? No. But it makes it a very real and reasonable possibility- one to be avoided.

In which democracy did that happen, historically?

I mean that is your argument right?

If I recall correctly California had people register their SKSs, then banned them a while later, conviently using the registration lists to know who to visit.


But don't worry! That won't happen again, promise!
 
2013-01-26 08:43:33 PM

truthseeker2083: Thank you. Much better than I could have put it.


NP. Used to people trying to abuse that argument about the chances of tyranny being equated with paranoia, and also calling out people who fallaciously employ claims of fallacy.
 
2013-01-26 08:43:43 PM

LavenderWolf: TRYING TO TAKE THE GUNS AWAY FROM AMERICANS LIKE THE RIGHT WING IS CONSTANTLY AFRAID OF IS PATENTLY ABSURD. IT WOULD RESULT IN THE DEATHS OF THOUSANDS, OR IF YOU'RE A PESSIMIST, MILLIONS.


All bolds, caps, and big letters? That must mean serious derp. He's only interested in registration, which makes confiscation a lot easier.

/Seriously, he thinks it will save a child in Coxsackie or something
 
2013-01-26 08:43:47 PM

omeganuepsilon: LavenderWolf: The "slippery slope argument" is a logical fallacy.

Wrong.

It can be =/= IS

In this case, it is not a fallacy.

Our very founders noted that, historically, the first step in tyranny is limiting power of the people. That much is true, and is applicable today in 3rd world countries still. But even in the discussions of the times of the US in it's infancy, it's mentioned directly, that to be unable to defend one's self is practically inviting ne'er do wells to accost you.

Scale is irrelevant, be it a bandit, a foreign nation, or a domestic threat(to include a government gone bad).

His argument is not that it's inevitable, only that it is one less safeguard the people have against such things, and there is real historical(even modern) precedence for such worry.


The problem with that argument is that the power of an individual to do harm, and the power of the possible adversaries to deal with that harm, has changed since the founding fathers put ink to paper.

If the US Government decides you are going to die, you can have the biggest private arsenal in the world, you are still going to die.

Conversely, if a crazy person with a grudge goes crazy, he can kill dozens before being stopped.

But, again, we're not talking about taking guns away from people.* We're talking about registering firearms to make it easier to track their unlawful sale and use. We need to do something about gun violence that actually has something to do with guns and violence.

(* except crazy people and violent criminals)
 
2013-01-26 08:44:17 PM

LavenderWolf: TRYING TO TAKE THE GUNS AWAY FROM AMERICANS LIKE THE RIGHT WING IS CONSTANTLY AFRAID OF IS PATENTLY ABSURD. IT WOULD RESULT IN THE DEATHS OF THOUSANDS, OR IF YOU'RE A PESSIMIST, MILLIONS.



Except it has been done within the US, and some politicians are seriously proposing another round of gun confiscations.

An unregistered gun, legal or illegal, is currently protected by the fifth amendment. But a registered gun, legal or illegal, is protected by nothing more than faith that those in office won't institute a retroactive ban and use the registration as probable cause to get a warrant to confiscate the newly banned gun.
 
2013-01-26 08:44:23 PM

Maximer: justtray: In which democracy did that happen, historically?

I mean that is your argument right?

Germany, Spain, Italy, Japan... to name the big ones. And, it may be argued that Russia's democratic government is in the process of be usurped. Of course, there are many more examples of firearm registration followed by confiscation in other countries that were not democratic to begin with.

I don't think the fact that we have a representative republic somehow evolves our leaders to a level that they will not fall into the same acts of tyrannies that have been perpetuated by governments throughout human existence. If you truly believe that our species has evolved that greatly within the last 100 years then I think you should reread the history books again.


You're going to have to source those for me, because I find them to be total BS. And I'm also pretty sure you're using a Godwin here as well. Hard to take you seriously, especially when I google it and I don't come up with these countries.

If you DON'T think we have evolved in the last 100 years, YOU need to read the history books. I mean, seriously? How dishonest are you?
 
2013-01-26 08:44:57 PM
Whose side are you on, BronyMedic? Because from here, it looks like you want to disarm the law abiding people, and leave the criminals with their illegal guns. I'm really having a hard time understanding how anyone could think that this helps anyone other than the criminals.

Hello?

HELLO? Since you're dis-arming me, will you now protect me?
 
2013-01-26 08:45:06 PM

Maximer: truthseeker2083: Maximer: truthseeker2083: I didn't say anything worse would happen, merely that I'm uncomfortable about opening that door. I know what the government did once it had the Patriot act, I only shudder to think of what will happen if we give them power over more of our rights.

Will I need to register every one of my rights in order to use them? Where's the form to register my 1st, 4th, & 5th Amendments? I'll get to those other ones later...

According to some in this thread, that would be acceptable. I'll keep my rights free of registration... as long as I can.

The face that you would not like to have these dangerous rights controlled and registered by the government scares me? Why would you really need the right against unlawful search or seizures... or not to self incriminate? I mean, if you didn't do anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about.

These "rights nuts" are always going on about freedom and liberty. It's insane. The government are the people and of course they would never do anything that may not be in the best interest of the people...


You may want to note that it was sarcasm. This is a heated thread.

/armed thread too...LOL
 
2013-01-26 08:45:14 PM

muck4doo: LavenderWolf: TRYING TO TAKE THE GUNS AWAY FROM AMERICANS LIKE THE RIGHT WING IS CONSTANTLY AFRAID OF IS PATENTLY ABSURD. IT WOULD RESULT IN THE DEATHS OF THOUSANDS, OR IF YOU'RE A PESSIMIST, MILLIONS.

All bolds, caps, and big letters? That must mean serious derp. He's only interested in registration, which makes confiscation a lot easier.

/Seriously, he thinks it will save a child in Coxsackie or something


Hey, if someone is going to misread my intent and deride me for it multiple times, I'm pretty justified in making it as perfectly clear as possible what the intent was.
 
Displayed 50 of 1301 comments

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report