My Side of the 2nd Amendment

[mobulis]

I missed the part where it say thou shalt not be inconvenienced getting a gun.

[SimplyTrying]

@Steel-W0LF

@SimplyTrying

@Steel-W0LF

@SimplyTrying

@Steel-W0LF

It’s not?

Why are voter ID laws struck down?

Answer: Because the left claims it impedes the poor from voting.

Why are IDs required to purchase a firearm when impeding the purchase of a firearm is unconstitutional without amending the 2nd.

The reason is we have compromised. The liberal version of compromise is: “I want ALL of your stuff, but if you give me half I’ll try to get the rest later.”

That’s nonsense.

Dismissive post with no substance or debate.

Well done for really thinking this one through. I’m sure many will be swayed to your vast display of mental prowess.

Yes, I dismiss nonsense. My time is too valuable.

It’s obviously not. You’re here. You’re replying.

Yet you just can’t seem to be bothered to provide an actual thought out response to the question posed.

I don’t even remember what you were talking about. Lol.

[Samm]

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Mountain_Soldier

So nothing tangible. I thought this was a compromise? What are you giving up?

Tell us, suggest something. That’s what compromise is.

We want fewer gun laws, you want more. Let’s compromise and leave things as they are.

Let’s meet in the middle. Are you capable? And btw, there are actually fewer gun laws today than at times in the past.

That IS the middle.

There are considerablely more gun laws today then in the 60s. I used to be able to buy guns through the US Mail from ads in a magazine with no background check whatsoever. Where on earth did you come up with that one?

Let’s redefine the assault weapons ban and put it back in place. That’s more recent history than the sixties.

And what do you think that would accomplish? Seriously, what?

It might save one life - it might save one thousand. The answer is not to keep the status quo.

What about the lives that are saved by people with guns, don’t they count?

Change simply for the sake of change is not the answer. In a word, it’s foolish.

By the way, do you know what the so-called “assault weapons ban” actually banned?

[SimplyTrying]

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

@Mountain_Soldier

So nothing tangible. I thought this was a compromise? What are you giving up?

Tell us, suggest something. That’s what compromise is.

We want fewer gun laws, you want more. Let’s compromise and leave things as they are.

Let’s meet in the middle. Are you capable? And btw, there are actually fewer gun laws today than at times in the past.

That IS the middle.

There are considerablely more gun laws today then in the 60s. I used to be able to buy guns through the US Mail from ads in a magazine with no background check whatsoever. Where on earth did you come up with that one?

Let’s redefine the assault weapons ban and put it back in place. That’s more recent history than the sixties.

And what do you think that would accomplish? Seriously, what?

It might save one life - it might save one thousand. The answer is not to keep the status quo.

What about the lives that are saved by people with guns, don’t they count?

Change simply for the sake of change is not the answer. In a word, it’s foolish.

By the way, do you know what the so-called “assault weapons ban” actually banned?

I’d say more die from gun violence. And the people that die are often children and people that don’t care anything about gun control.

Yes, change can’t be just a feel good thing.

No, all I know Is that liberals are called ignorant because they don’t know what an assault weapon even is. That’s why I said redefine it.

[Samm]

@mobulis

By putting unsurmountable obstacles in the way (of voting,) which needing id for guns doesn’t.

What a laugh! The only people who are prevented from voting by voter ID laws are people who are ineligible to vote.

[Samm]

@mobulis

@Steel-W0LF

I love this argument comparing it to voter ID. It leaves them with their proverbial fly open for all to see.

This time there’s two twisting on the hook.

Nope sorry.

You should be.

[SimplyTrying]

@Samm

@mobulis

By putting unsurmountable obstacles in the way (of voting,) which needing id for guns doesn’t.

What a laugh! The only people who are prevented from voting by voter ID laws are people who are ineligible to vote.

Republicans are doing everything they can to suppress minority votes. Why?

[Samm]

@mobulis

I missed the part where it say thou shalt not be inconvenienced getting a gun.

“Shall not be infringed”

If you don’t know what that means, have your mom explain it to you.

[Samm]

That’s the thing about proving that something did not happen, because of something else. When it doesn’t happen, there’s nothing to report so it isn’t recorded. Think about how many automobile accidents did not happen because someone was driving defensively and avoided the accident. The same goes for acts of violence that did not occur because the assailant was deterred because their intended victim was armed.

[Samm]

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

@mobulis

By putting unsurmountable obstacles in the way (of voting,) which needing id for guns doesn’t.

What a laugh! The only people who are prevented from voting by voter ID laws are people who are ineligible to vote.

Republicans are doing everything they can to suppress minority votes. Why?

That’s a lie. Why are you repeating it?

[SimplyTrying]

@Samm

That’s the thing about proving that something did not happen, because of something else. When it doesn’t happen, there’s nothing to report so it isn’t recorded. Think about how many automobile accidents did not happen because someone was driving defensively and avoided the accident. The same goes for acts of violence that did not occur because the assailant was deterred because their intended victim was armed.

I’m sorry. I just don’t buy that.

[Samm]

@SimplyTrying

@Samm

That’s the thing about proving that something did not happen, because of something else. When it doesn’t happen, there’s nothing to report so it isn’t recorded. Think about how many automobile accidents did not happen because someone was driving defensively and avoided the accident. The same goes for acts of violence that did not occur because the assailant was deterred because their intended victim was armed.

I’m sorry. I just don’t buy that.

That doesn’t rebut it. Maybe you can look it up in the almanac of things that did not happen and get back to me.

[mobulis]

@Samm

@mobulis

I missed the part where it say thou shalt not be inconvenienced getting a gun.

“Shall not be infringed”

If you don’t know what that means, have your mom explain it to you.

Then why aren’t guns free?

[Samm]

The government does not make or own the guns to give away. They simply are prevented by the Constitution from infringing on your right to have them. The cost of purchasing a gun is between you and the individual who built it. It’s called commerce. But even you knew that … I hope.

[Tilly_jow]

@Samm

@SimplyTrying

Republicans are doing everything they can to suppress minority votes. Why?

That’s a lie. Why are you repeating it?

That you can say that defies belief.

[mobulis]

@Samm

The government does not make or own the guns to give away. They simply are prevented by the Constitution from infringing on your right to have them. The cost of purchasing a gun is between you and the individual who built it. It’s called commerce. But even you knew that … I hope.

Do guns have sales tax on them?

[Samm]

Show your work.

[Samm]

@mobulis

@Samm

The government does not make or own the guns to give away. They simply are prevented by the Constitution from infringing on your right to have them. The cost of purchasing a gun is between you and the individual who built it. It’s called commerce. But even you knew that … I hope.

Do guns have sales tax on them?

Commerce.

[Tilly_jow]

Republicans have always made it clear that they have no interest in doing the two things that would increase voter turnout. Voting over multiple days. And/or voting on weekends.

[Samm]

@Tilly_jow

Republicans have always made it clear that they have no interest in doing the two things that would increase voter turnout. Voting over multiple days. And/or voting on weekends.

I said show your work, not your opinion.