PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Gun Control Debates
     Heller Vs DC
       Supreme Court ruling

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

For all those that were saying that people did not have a right to own guns, you are now officially wrong. It is now an individuals constitutional right to bear arms. A great day for those who oppose victimizing our public.
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 10:58 PM on June 27, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

In case you have not read any of the ruling...

"Respondent Heller, a D. C. special policeman, applied to register a handgun he wished to keep at home, but the District refused.  He filed this suit seeking, on Second Amendment grounds, to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requirement insofar as it prohibits carrying an unlicensed firearm in the home, and the trigger-lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of functional firearms in the home.  The District Court dismissed the suit, but the D. C. Circuit reversed, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess firearms and that the city’s total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that
firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right...

"The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment.  The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense.  Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional
muster.  Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.  Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and
must issue him a license to carry it in the home."

There is much more to the courts opinion that you would benefit by reading.

The right to bear arms has been protected (in the u.s.) since the drafting of the constitution and the bill of rights. (Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791)
The supreme court ruled that a citizens right to bear arms does not exclude firearms (as firearms are arguably a form of arms), and this is not news by any means. The officer in D.C. wished to bring his murder-tool into his house in working order, and went crying to the supreme court when he found that district of columbia law prohibited such idiocy.

The court maintains that the second amendment protects a citizens right to bear arms, and that reasonable people (any idiot with half a brain) may find firearms to be acceptable forms of arms. The court cannot make firearms legal or illegal; it is up to the people to decide whether and how they will be armed.

The choice is still yours, stunt_pirate. If you feel good about being a gun-toting, scum-of-the-earth-american-psycho, go for it; at least this way you don't have to worry about who your friends are...

(Edited by forfunt1 6/28/2008 at 6:46 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 6:43 PM on June 28, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Read the ruling and guess what, it was interpreted exactly how I have been explaining it. Let's go over the various points where you are now wrong with what you have been saying. Americans have a right to keep (own) and bear(carry) arms. "Arms" include firearms. I know it isn't news to me, though you seemed quite unable to understand it previously. I never said the court made firearms legal, just that they were re-affirming the right the 2nd amendment says cannot be infringed upon by the government. I accept your concession. Glad we can move past that.


As to your second "point," a more accurate description would be a Christian, nature-loving, liberal, prius-driving, peaceful gun owner. Owning a gun does not influence my life whatsoever. Strangely, you are much more affected by my gun ownership than I am. I would recommend seeing someone about that.

Enjoy the new onset of paranoia induced by people being able to protect themselves. It must get stressful cowering behind your keyboard praying a stray bullet doesn't kill you. You might find yourself getting in touch with reality and enjoying life more if you actually went out and lived it. Maybe you'd actually find someone who you would be willing to fight for.

I feel very sorry that you are filled with so much bitterness and anger that you are unwilling to see human life as valuable enough to defend. But I suppose when all the human contact you have is over the internet, such confusion is understandable.

You always evaded this question, so I'll ask it one last time, just for fun:

If someone in your family is about to be killed by someone they have done nothing against and you have the ability to stop it through force, would you act?
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 03:26 AM on June 30, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

uh... dar-da-dar-dar... retard.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 11:58 PM on July 12, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Ah, that makes sense. I apologize for not realizing your disability.
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 10:58 PM on July 13, 2008 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Every time the the phrase "the people" has been used it normally refers to the individuals with in a society. Using this logic I have the right to own and carry my fire arms. I dare you to defy my logic.



-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 10:53 PM on July 16, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I dare you to buy a gun and shoot somebody with it.

Better yet, use it to kill an animal, like a deer or an elk... yeah, or maybe you could go speeding down some mountain road in your toxic, offensive motor vehicle and ram into and murder some innocent creature crossing the road... I bet you will live through both incidents... come-on I dare you!

I have no doubt you are capable of doing either, I just wonder if somehow these experiences might remind you that you have a heart. Because, if you could remember that you do (or at least did sometime ago), you would not have to defend your privileges for fear of losing your rights.

I fear I am beginning to sound like a fool trying to make sense of this simple stuff for you. I should just leave you to die by your own devices.

And by the way, READ the ruling!

(Edited by admin 7/17/2008 at 9:54 PM).

(Edited by forfunt1 7/17/2008 at 10:35 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 9:39 PM on July 17, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 9:39 PM on July 17, 2008 :
I dare you to buy a gun and shoot somebody with it.

Better yet, use it to kill an animal, like a deer or an elk... yeah, or maybe you could go speeding down some mountain road in your toxic, offensive motor vehicle and ram into and murder some innocent creature crossing the road... I bet you will live through both incidents... come-on I dare you!

I have no doubt you are capable of doing either, I just wonder if somehow these experiences might remind you that you have a heart. Because, if you could remember that you do (or at least did sometime ago), you would not have to defend your privileges for fear of losing your rights.

I fear I am beginning to sound like a fool trying to make sense of this simple stuff for you. I should just leave you to die by your own devices.

And by the way, READ the ruling!

(Edited by admin 7/17/2008 at 9:54 PM).

(Edited by forfunt1 7/17/2008 at 10:35 PM).


I see that you are focusing more on insulting Silverstar's logic, rather than challenging it.


(Edited by Jabba66 7/28/2008 at 08:43 AM).


-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 08:41 AM on July 28, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Silverstar is using logic to get nowhere. I have a right blah, blah, blah... the supreme court says I do blah, blah, blah... I have a reason blah, blah, blah... but I have nothing to say other then 'I will not surrender my fears because I love the privilege of protection, and I will not surrender my privilege of protection because I can't live without my fear! I don't care about the cost!'

Logic is lunacy.

I have agreed time and time again that citizens have a right to bear arms; I have not said that the government should take away the privilege of citizens to carry firearms; I have said that firearms are not worth the suffering they cause, and anybody with a heart-beat ought to feel this way. Anybody that can justify the pain caused by firearms most likely has a black-hole where their heart would be. If a person is capable of feeling the suffering caused by firearms, they will not keep or bear them for any reason, and will encourage everyone else to do the same.

Remember that firearms have not been around forever, they were invented by humans, and life will go on just fine without them.

How about commenting on how you feel, instead of trying to trap others in these endless loops of 'my logic vs. your logic'. I'd rather say something I really feel.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 9:57 PM on July 28, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

See, isn't it easier once you admit to not having a good argument, rather than pretending you do? Since you have finally admitted that you were wrong, I will let this thread go off topic and onto people's feelings.

I feel that I have a right and a duty to protect my family. The government also feels that I have this right, hence the laws that allow for self-defense. I feel that the best way to insure my family's safety is to own a gun, if only to be prepared in case of a worst case scenario.

Forfunt, you claim that you cannot keep a firearm in light of the suffering it has caused and that everyone else should feel the same. Do you have  a car? Those cause suffering on a much grander scale than firearms. Do you drink? Alcohol is destroyer of families and lives all over the world. Do you enjoy eating? Obesity is one of the leading causes of death and health problems in America, but starvation is also widespread so you can't not eat, either. I imagine you stay away from water due to the drownings that have occurred and I'm sure you only eat with spoons due to the risk of stabbings from your forks and knives. People have died in their sleep, so that should be out.

In many cases the pain caused by people with firearms (firearms are inanimate, you do know that right?) is unjustifiable, which is why we send those people to jail. Everyone is allowed to protect themselves from those people.
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 04:55 AM on July 29, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hee heee hee heee haaha hahahahahahahaha!





-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 10:22 PM on July 29, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 9:57 PM on July 28, 2008 :
Silverstar is using logic to get nowhere. I have a right blah, blah, blah... the supreme court says I do blah, blah, blah... I have a reason blah, blah, blah... but I have nothing to say other then 'I will not surrender my fears because I love the privilege of protection, and I will not surrender my privilege of protection because I can't live without my fear! I don't care about the cost!'


How is this relevant?

Logic is lunacy.


I believe that's left-winger speak for "Anything I don't understand is lunacy.

I have agreed time and time again that citizens have a right to bear arms; I have not said that the government should take away the privilege of citizens to carry firearms; I have said that firearms are not worth the suffering they cause, and anybody with a heart-beat ought to feel this way.


This might be relevant if you can give me statistics to prove to me that they kill more than anything else.  Good luck.

Oh, and look at this, please.   Unless you can find a more reliable counter source, your argument is six feet under.

Anybody that can justify the pain caused by firearms most likely has a black-hole where their heart would be.


As usual, erroneous conclusions follow baseless accusations.  Oh, and what pain to guns cause?  I would say that guns are much more merciful than knives and clubs.

If a person is capable of feeling the suffering caused by firearms, they will not keep or bear them for any reason, and will encourage everyone else to do the same.


You haven't been encouraging us so much as you've been insulting us.

Remember that firearms have not been around forever, they were invented by humans, and life will go on just fine without them.


Then I guess we can just do away with the wheel, agriculture, clothing, and houses.  We can all go back to walking around naked in caves, and choosing between hunting or starving.  After all, this stuff is all just manmade, and we'll live fine without it, right?  Of course, we could live like that, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to.  Your argument lacks some logic.

How about commenting on how you feel, instead of trying to trap others in these endless loops of 'my logic vs. your logic'. I'd rather say something I really feel.


Emotions don't usually help in debates.  I don't see the presidential canidates crying, yelling, and swearing at eachother.  Would you want to vote for someone like that?




(Edited by Jabba66 7/30/2008 at 9:55 PM).


-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 9:43 PM on July 30, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

oh... jabba, jabba, jabba... sigh... I hope you wake up before you (and the rest of the blind-fools like you) decide to turn the lights out on everyone else.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 10:55 PM on July 30, 2008 | IP
Ichigo

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Owning guns is not a privilege as you say its a Inalienable right. Show me where guns get up and kill by themselves!! Thanks for showing your represent Obama  and the DNC's hatred of the Constitution.

"On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322)

"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.)

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" (Noah Webster in 'An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution', 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888))
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 12:08 PM on July 31, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 10:55 PM on July 30, 2008 :
oh... jabba, jabba, jabba... sigh... I hope you wake up before you (and the rest of the blind-fools like you) decide to turn the lights out on everyone else.


Face it.  You've been owned in this argument.  All of your arguments are six feet under.  And you say that because you have no counter argument.  Either that, or you're too lazy to quote me.



-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 2:23 PM on July 31, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You nailed it! I have been 'owned', my arguments are 'six feet under', I have no counter argument, and 'I am too lazy to quote' you. Wow, you have such a keen intellect, I'm amazed this 'debate' has come this far.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 11:41 AM on August 2, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 11:41 AM on August 2, 2008 :
You nailed it! I have been 'owned', my arguments are 'six feet under', I have no counter argument, and 'I am too lazy to quote' you. Wow, you have such a keen intellect, I'm amazed this 'debate' has come this far.


If this is sarcasm, well, responding to the entire post with a one liner is a sure sign of desperation.




-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 10:08 PM on August 2, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am not sure what you mean by desperation. Will you tell me what I am desperate for?

(Edited by forfunt1 8/3/2008 at 06:28 AM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 06:28 AM on August 3, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Apparently attention...
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 02:22 AM on August 4, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Haven't I your attention? I am still unsure of jabba66's use of the word desperation.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 8:50 PM on August 19, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

JH
Quote from forfunt1 at 06:28 AM on August 3, 2008 :
I am not sure what you mean by desperation. Will you tell me what I am desperate for?

(Edited by forfunt1 8/3/2008 at 06:28 AM).


What aren't you desperate for?  You refused to read my posts, and instead sunk to the point of attacking my logic, and yet you claim to have an argument?  Well, if you do, then let's hear it.




-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 8:38 PM on August 21, 2008 | IP
USSOCOM

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It's so stupid to think that inanimate objects are evil. Its nearly superstitious!
You know what? Pallet jacks are evil now, because last month one just came by and crushed my toe, shattering it! Never mind that I might have been going too fast with it... They are terrible, evil things and you dont have a heart if you have or use one! You'll never know the suffering I went through, and am still going through. Until you do you'll never be alive. You have every right to keep and bear pallet jacks and i hope that you all die by them someday...
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 10:15 AM on August 22, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Argue about what ever you can; the choice as to whether you own a firearm is your choice.

Can you live with your decision? Can everything else live with your decision?

Come-on this isn't mathematics; If you think it is, and mean to make the decision accordingly, maybe you should not own (a) gun(s).

Sorry 'bout the toe, sounds painful ;-)

(Edited by forfunt1 8/29/2008 at 7:51 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 7:48 PM on August 29, 2008 | IP
racerba

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 7:48 PM on August 29, 2008 :
...the choice as to whether you own a firearm is your choice.

Can you live with your decision? Can everything else live with your decision?

Come-on this isn't mathematics;...
(Edited by forfunt1 8/29/2008 at 7:51 PM).

Yes, it's my choice and the SC ruled it that way.

Yes, I can live with my decision.  The world is not going to change because I own a gun.  At least not for the law abiding citizens.

Where did you get the math part?
 


Posts: 11 | Posted: 5:29 PM on September 2, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

racerba,

Open your eyes; It sounds like you are one of the many americans that has not woken-up yet.

Let me ask you, how big is the world you think you live in?


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 9:13 PM on September 2, 2008 | IP
racerba

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 9:13 PM on September 2, 2008 :
Let me ask you, how big is the world you think you live in?

Bigger than your rose colored world.


 


Posts: 11 | Posted: 1:58 PM on September 3, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am confused by your usage of 'rose-colored' to describe the world I live in. I guess you were reaching a bit in order to get me back for implying that you think you live in a world that does not exist.

Anyway, I have never before been told that I live in  'rose-colored' world, and I am wondering what you mean. I guess that the people who know me would say that I have a positive (affirmative) attitude about life, and many would say that I tend to get excited about fun stuff, but I have never been told that I gloss over, or distort things in order to make them look rosy. I'm curious how you have been able to see me this way, I guess mainly, because you are the first person to make the observation.

As far as the question I asked, about the size of the world you think you live in; I asked because many of your responses to my questions portray you as a short-sighted, reckless, megalomaniac. Of course this is only the impression your words have made on me, and I am not going to let your words take the place of your actions. As far as I am concerned you most likely have no special intention to cause harm, and you probably do not cause any harm to others in socially unacceptable ways. If you live by your words, then you are causing suffering (as even I am), but none of that suffering is necessary, or unpreventable.

The supreme court has ruled that you have the right to keep and bear firearms, as firearms are reasonably a form of arms, and the second amendment guarantees the individual right to keep and bear arms. Simple, 1 + 1 = 2 mentality.

There is still a choice in the matter.

You can either take full advantage of your permission, or you can live without firearms.

You don't have to give up your right to bear arms, you just have to grow-up and realize that only cowards will pull the trigger; If you can't stand your ground by the power of your will, with strength (physical), courage and conviction, then you will most likely resort to arming yourself with a firearm so that you don't have to lose what you can't afford to keep.

(Edited by forfunt1 9/6/2008 at 1:42 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 1:27 PM on September 6, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'm still curious...
Would you kill to protect yourself or your family from being murdered?
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 11:49 AM on September 8, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 1:27 PM on September 6, 2008 :
You don't have to give up your right to bear arms, you just have to grow-up and realize that only cowards will pull the trigger; If you can't stand your ground by the power of your will, with strength (physical), courage and conviction, then you will most likely resort to arming yourself with a firearm so that you don't have to lose what you can't afford to keep.


Once again, you demonstrate your naive belief that you are capable of fighting a hoodlum in a fist fight.  First off, home invaders can come in numbers; second, hoodlums are nearly immune to pain; I know this.  I was pain resistant as they are.  But I also have the first-hand wisdom to understand that they are organized, and crafty - an advantage that you don't have.  They're not the simple-minded thugs you believe them to be; they're intelligent.  Oh, and by the way, they often carry guns to.  Your fists vs. their guns; who will win?

Of course, I only expect two responses from you: an evasion, or an off-topic retort.  

(Edited by forfunt1 9/6/2008 at 1:42 PM).






-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 9:49 PM on September 16, 2008 | IP
racerba

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 1:27 PM on September 6, 2008 :
...I have a positive (affirmative) attitude about life, and many would say that I tend to get excited about fun stuff, but I have never been told that I gloss over, or distort things in order to make them look rosy...


Having a positive attitude is always well and good.  Having the choice to own firearms or not is also good.  You choose to not have one, and that fine and that's your choice.  No gun owner think negative of you for your choice.  But your negative views of others (gun owners) is wrong.  You accuse all of them of being cowards.  These includes the weak and/or the old who choose to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from those stronger than they are, intent on doing them harm.  Would you still call a girl or a 70 year old person a coward because they chose to be armed to protect themselves from being a rape victim or a crime victim?  You ask how I see you living in a rose-color world?  The answer is simple...

You feel that your view is the only right view.  You feel you do not need to own firearms and you can or think you can protect yourself from any situation. You feel that others do not need to own firearms makes you ignorant to their needs.  In your rose colored world, you will triumph all adversaries and so can everybody else.  In the real world, that is not true.  Not everybody can overcome all situations, including you - this is where you distort your world to make it rosy.

Choosing to own a firearm also means choosing to be responsible.  This means knowing when to use it and when not to use it.  I also have a positive views on life, but I am also a realist.  I know there are situations where I do not need to use my gun, and I also know that there will be situations where I will need to use it.  It's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

You say that we are causing suffering - how so?  
 


Posts: 11 | Posted: 1:48 PM on September 17, 2008 | IP
Jabba66

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Jabba66 at 9:49 PM on September 16, 2008 :
Quote from forfunt1 at 1:27 PM on September 6, 2008 :
You don't have to give up your right to bear arms, you just have to grow-up and realize that only cowards will pull the trigger; If you can't stand your ground by the power of your will, with strength (physical), courage and conviction, then you will most likely resort to arming yourself with a firearm so that you don't have to lose what you can't afford to keep.


Once again, you demonstrate your naive belief that you are capable of fighting a hoodlum in a fist fight.  First off, home invaders can come in numbers; second, hoodlums are nearly immune to pain; I know this.  I was pain resistant as they are.  But I also have the first-hand wisdom to understand that they are organized, and crafty - an advantage that you don't have.  They're not the simple-minded thugs you believe them to be; they're intelligent.  Oh, and by the way, they often carry guns to.  Your fists vs. their guns; who will win?

Of course, I only expect two responses from you: an evasion, or an off-topic retort.  




-------
Mikiyuna! Pasta mo rulya! Do bata gee mwaa tusawa!
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 7:25 PM on September 18, 2008 | IP
America4ever

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

the only fear i sense is yours of a Inanimate object.

if gun control worked which it does not 32 people including a Jewish Holocaust survivor at VA Tech which had gun control laws. Gun control does not work cause criminals who are willing to rape and kill do not care about your pc BS laws. gun control only effects the Law abiding American.
Hitler started gun control laws to make it easier for him to kill off all the Jews and non muslims. the kkk started gun control laws to make it easier for them to terrorize non ayrans.  
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 9:20 PM on October 17, 2010 | IP
derwood

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from SilverStar at 9:53 PM on July 16, 2008 :
"... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Every time the the phrase "the people" has been used it normally refers to the individuals with in a society. Using this logic I have the right to own and carry my fire arms. I dare you to defy my logic.




It is so cute how often we see half of the 2nd amendment simply omitted:


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Funny how often that whole part about WELL REGULATED militia is never mentioned.




-------
Lester:

"I said I have a doctorate and a university background in anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, physics, chemistry, pathology etc. ..."
 


Posts: 1646 | Posted: 9:12 PM on October 18, 2010 | IP
TerrytheAwesomeness

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Wow, I know this topic kind of died a while back, but hearing you talk about how if anyone knows the suffering a firearm can cause wouldn't own one?  What the hell group are you talking about?  You're probably one that would rather be killed than use a gun to kill someone.  In all honesty, you probably also believe that a soldier or Marine shouldn't shoot an AK-47 wielding Iraqi 12-year old because "he's a child."  Moreover, the point is, you don't necessarily buy guns to kill people, but to protect your family and your assets.  And you probably think I'm a psycho because I drive an F-250 Super Duty (it's diesel-powered, in case your environmentalist self didn't realize it), I love beef, and I love hunting deer.  Also, I don't mind actually killing the animal I'm gonna eat.  I smoke and I drink...just like the good ole U.S. of A., and our fore fathers say we can do.  So, you can spare the murderers life to protect your principle of "if you own a gun, you're bad," and I'll be the guy still livin life, eatin red meat, drivin trucks, smokin and drinkin whiskey.  Those are what make America great.  God bless the U.S.A.!!!  


-------
Only in the eyes can the true story be told.
 


Posts: 4 | Posted: 4:14 PM on July 20, 2011 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.