Need help argueing an anti


PDA

Jesse H
May 14, 2003, 05:07 PM
If you've got some free time...

http://www.houston-imports.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16580&perpage=20&pagenumber=4

I post as "Juicy". This guy, "liquifided tiger" just doesn't get it...and I have a feeling he won't.

If you enjoyed reading about "Need help argueing an anti" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
TechBrute
May 14, 2003, 05:12 PM
Government abuse is the problem. That is the reason for the RKBA in the first place... government abuse. It's like a catch 22. They say they won't abuse us once they have our guns. Once they have our guns, we have no way of stopping them.

Elmer Snerd
May 14, 2003, 05:24 PM
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?&threadid=16678

Jesse H
May 14, 2003, 05:25 PM
Oh well, I politely stepped out of the discussion. Not worth my time. :D

CZ-75
May 14, 2003, 05:29 PM
What's a "taggart"? Does he mean "taggant"?

If so, how will putting little near-microscopic bits of plastic in powder solve gun crimes?

Perhaps this clown's confusing ballistic fingerprinting with taggants used to trace explosives by batch. We all know why ballistic fingerprinting won't work.

MeekandMild
May 14, 2003, 05:35 PM
Jesse, you can't reason with him. He sounds like he has no knowledge base. He needs to do some skeet shooting or a few reactive steel targets with a .22, even an air rifle. Sometimes the fact that the gun doesn't turn back and kill them on the spot nor do the other folks on the shooting line turn into vampires and witches seems to help them to gain insight.

Sometimes not even that will help. Doesn't matter that criminals will MAKE all the weapons they want if they can't steal them.

I gave up some months ago with poor Joe the Barber. As far as I can tell his head is still back in Viet Nam when he couldn't trust anyone except the guys in his squad. Even though both of us with all our diligence could only find ONE single shooting with a legal Uzi back in 1984 he's still against them.

Penforhire
May 14, 2003, 05:39 PM
I think that person is beyond salvage. Even if he was the victim of a home invasion or violent street crime he would just whine that the bad guys shouldn't have had guns and "where were the cops?".

But in general, keep your cool. The phrasing of some of your responses suggest too much emotion. Sure you want to appeal to emotion eventually but you have to lay down the logic first and probably convince your "opponent" that you, personally, are a level headed fellow who has looked at every angle.

I like the fire department analogy (why have an extinguisher if you can just call the Fire Dept).

I also like stating firmly that "need" (for an AK47) is not a part of your 2nd amendment rights. "Need" leads down a path of saying why do you need 'X' number of bullets in a gun to begin with. The issue is more, why does he have a "need" to keep an AK47 out of your hands? What is it about any particular armament that he objects to?

For the record, I am not personally against bar-coded bullets. We have the right to bear arms but we do not have the right to anonymity.

Standing Wolf
May 14, 2003, 05:45 PM
Attempting to reason with anti-Second Amendment bigots is a lot like trying to herd squirrels: they enjoy it, and you accomplish nothing.

Ian
May 14, 2003, 05:48 PM
PenForHire,

...and if a bullet manufacturer wants to number all their bullets, fine. The market will determine whether people like the idea or not. But the Feds have no authority to make such tracking mandatory.

.:IceMan:.
May 14, 2003, 06:10 PM
Well, the deal with Liquified Tiger is he'll take the opposite side of whatever you want to debate about. He's supposedly a Martial Arts expert. But that means diddly when your opponent is 9 feet from you. Your not Bruce lee and your not the magical dragon to appear and disappear at your will..

He admits to having a hot head and thats teh reason he doesnt take his gun so as my last post describes I told him that it would be people like him that would cause others to arguing as he does. Ironic.

4v50 Gary
May 14, 2003, 06:21 PM
No one wins arguments & both sides walk away just as convinced as ever before. What to do? :confused: I try to get their blood pressure up. ;) If they keel over, I win. :evil:

Gordon Fink
May 14, 2003, 06:29 PM
… We have the right to bear arms but we do not have the right to anonymity.

Are you sure? Read on …

U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What are my “papers,” if they are not the records of my public and private dealings?

~G. Fink

Penforhire
May 14, 2003, 07:05 PM
Ian and Gordon, I still believe you are in a heavy gray area, with regard to "registration" and "papers." I see nothing that guarantees this anonymity. Said registration is NOT the same as "search and seizure," more like a "search index."

I also agree that registration makes it easier for the goverment to commit the abuses-to-come, such as rounding up all privately owned guns. Nevertheless, registration in and of itself does not violate that Amendment IMHO. Disclaimer: I am not a constituional lawyer nor do I play at being one, only following common sense.

Everyone born in the US has a birth certificate filed in the county of their birth. Do you consider this a violation of the Constitution?

4v50 Gary
May 14, 2003, 07:50 PM
There's a bozo here in Cali that believes the First Amendment is the most important safeguard for our rights.

Yeah, and Mao was right when he said power comes from a barrel of the gun. Try distributing newspapers, waving signs or banners or chanting anti-government slogans to a Stalinist government. Gulag if you're lucky and if you're not, you simply disappear.

Stickjockey
May 14, 2003, 11:25 PM
Jesse-

Forget about it, man. Just read the whole thread, and it's a losing proposition. The dude's mind is made up; don't confuse him with the facts.:rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "Need help argueing an anti" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!