i have never heard an anti spout BS like this before

[buy guns]

Cars do indeed kill. There’s no denying that. BUT, our society has realized that the BENEFITS of the automobile outweigh the consequences of crazy drivers or 550hp modded street machines.

On the other hand, assault rifles have in no way shown MODERN society that they outweigh the negative consequences that they inflict. The key here is MODERN society and not the era in which our forefathers demanded our right to bear arms.

It is for this reason that over the last 20-30 years, lawyers, politicians, etc., have so diligently been fighting the prevalence of guns in our society. The reason that they picked assault rifles is ONLY because that was an easy target. I understand that statistically assault rifles are insignificant. THAT’S NOT THE POINT. The point is that this was an effort to retard the prevalence of guns in our society. And it’s not just one or two individuals who are anti-guns. It is a holistic movement by our nation in which we are beginning to recognize that the benefits once offered by these weapons are NO longer needed(if you don’t believe me then just look at a historical chart of the percentage of the population that bears arms). It is nothing to be ashamed or scared of…if anything, it is something to be proud of…it can be seen as an evolutionary step that our country is taking.

Times change people and so does the INTENT OF THE LAW.

this is part of a long post on a car message board about the AWB. right now it is just on guns in general. luckily there are other sane minded gun owners there to help me out.

 

[GEM]

The argument is one based on morality heuristics. The car doesn't have an intentionality of being an instrument of lethal force and does have perceived positive benefit. Some philosophers and social scientistis argue that the intentionality of lethal force is the moral problem with firearms. Having an instrument whose purpose is lethal is not acceptable. Car deaths are not planned but unfortunate consequences of a nonharmful use. Gun deaths are because of their lethality.

Gun folks try to avoid this by saying that guns are tools but that is BS. The right to to have them is predicated on their lethal nature as that is what will give you personal protection and the ability to resist tyranny.

The latter purpose is the moral basis to compensate for the potential harm that guns do to society. If you don't buy that argument, then you don't buy the RKBA.

It's the footbridge and trolley problem discussion from moral philosophy. Intentional death is worse than nonintentional death. Guns are intentional, cars are not. Thus, guns are bad according to this moral heuristic. The countervailing arguments are:

1. The moral nature of self-defense and defense against tyranny from a theoretic and philsophical base
2. The utlitarian argument that society is better with self-defense and defense against tyranny.

There will be a test and an essay.

 

[reagansquad]

What about people who live in the country and want to keep coyotes from eating their toy poodles?

 

[flatrock]

The latter purpose is the moral basis to compensate for the potential harm that guns do to society.

Guns do not harm society. Guns are inanimate objects, they are incapable of harming society, or even an individual person.

People can harm other people with guns.

They can also harm them with automobiles, baseball bast, golf clubs, knives, bricks, and all kinds of things.

A gun is particularly good at inflicting harm. Criminals use them because they are effective. However, they are also very effective when used for defense.

If you took away all guns, you wouldn't stop violent crime. You just make it harder for the weak to defend themselves from the strong.

Criminals by definition don't follow laws. Much of the violent crime is committed by felons that are already banned from owning guns.

Gun control laws don't work. Reducing the availability of guns might reduce the amount of violent crimes committed with guns, but it doesn't reduce the rate of violent crimes. Criminals just make use of other weapons.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Round all these blissninnies up, strip 'em naked and put 'em in rubber rooms with no sharp or hard objects so they can never hurt themselves.

 

[El Tejon]

Quite an admission from the other side! It's not about crime, it's about control!

 

[mnrivrat]

Qoute : "Gun folks try to avoid this by saying that guns are tools but that is BS. The right to to have them is predicated on their lethal nature as that is what will give you personal protection and the ability to resist tyranny."


And then some of us think that the benifits of individual rights , and freedoms is what this country was founded on . No matter what the intent of that feedom of choice is, it is the feedom to choose that is most important.
A need to justify reasons for the rights given in the constitution was never intended , simply stated or implied.

Even so , my right to personal protection does not come from society or the government . Not if I am a free man .

If need be , I am the lethal part of the equation and not my firearm. It ,in fact , IS just a tool.

 

[Bubbles]

Nugget of truth in the BS

The reason that they picked assault rifles is ONLY because that was an easy target.

Wow - even a blind pig finds an acorn periodically.

It's for this same reason that the anti's are going after .50-cal rifles. They figure that very few people can afford to own and shoot them, so most gun owners won't fight this battle.

Fortunately, most of us have wised up during the ten years of the AWB, and we know that the blissninnies won't stop at AW's and .50-cal rifles.

 

[Justin]

*snort*

Ambrose Bierce was right. Leftists are indeed the sort of people who think that a fair and egalitarian society can be brought about through threats of violence and censorship.

Ask this person just how they would enforce such a law.

In order for them to get this so-called modern society free of the scourge of guns, they have to admit that the only way it works is by threatening the use of force against those gun owners who disobey such a stupid and silly law.

 

[mountain_cowboy]

Excellent reply, GEM.

 

[Cacique500]

Tell him that you don't support his 1st Amendment right to free speech. How could our forefathers have forseen internet forums? Tell him if he wants to spout his bs he can go hunt down a printing press and mail you a copy.

 

[strambo]

Tell him if he wants to spout his bs he can go hunt down a printing press and mail you a copy.

Bwahahahaha! ROLMAO!

 

[Harry Tuttle]

We ran into this variety of kool aid drinking utopia-ist at the National Tribute to Jim & Sarah Brady in 2001.

They really believe that if they could banish firearms from this existence we would all happily take our government cheese and be safe, productive members of society.

 

[ALS]

One answer usually shuts them up. Ask the Korean Shop keepers in south central Los Angeles whether or not they would have their business with out their Guns. During the Rodney King riots in the early 1990's I seem to remember the news brodcasts showing the shop keepers on the sidewalk or on the roofs with Ar-15's and shotguns defending their businesses. Those that stood their ground lost nothing those who relied on the LAPD to protect their property lost everything.

 

[MP5]

we are beginning to recognize that the benefits once offered by these weapons are NO longer needed

Try casually arguing that to the guy who's just invaded your home and is about to butcher you and your family. Murder and treachery have been around since Cain and Abel. Banning certain weapons won't erase what's evil in human nature. Allow the weak and innocent, the brave and virtuous to arm themselves. They deserve a chance at survival, and they have the moral duty to resist evil--within and without.

 

[fistful]

just look at a historical chart of the percentage of the population that bears arms

Yeah, guys, just go and look at one of those charts! If you can find one. If we had such a chart, it would probably bear an inverse relationship to the crime rate. Hello?

So if the gun-toters are a minority then they must conform? How much conformity and elitism do we have to see from these people before we all realize that they are the conservatives.

Of course, the chart would also show the effect of teaching children that they are animals that evolved through random processes and therefore have no real value.:banghead:

 

[Deavis]

we are beginning to recognize that the benefits once offered by these weapons are NO longer needed

I guess if you live in a neighborhood with a police response time of 1 minute. It must be nice to live in a place where nobody gets robbed or mugged. Have a friend who was anti-gun, "no need for guns we have cops" until she got mugged. Funny how that works.

 

[OF]

i have never heard an anti spout BS like this before

You need to get out more.

- Gabe

 

[oldfart]

While I agree that guns were and are designed as lethal weapons, I generally use mine as a toy, shooting targets. There are reports from time to time of people using baseball bats to kill or harm other people, i.e., using a toy as a weapon. Which is worse? I think I know, but does the blissninny?

 

[ZeroX]

The better parallel to use when debating is cigarettes. They kill way more people than guns and everyone knows it.

 

[Foreign Devil]

Going with the car example, tell him that his logic demands that we put governors in cars restricting their speed to around the national speed limit. After all, the benefits of being able to drive that fast are outweighed by the negative consequences of permitting people to own these kinds of vehicles.

 

[Russ]

At the very least the "anti" is being honest in that AW's are not the ultimate goal but all guns. They should blow their smoke up someone else's because I don't care what they have to say.

 

[Demon440]

lol I am in that thread, under the same screen name. Can I say what forum that is? Also by far most people on there are pro RKBA.

 

[rbrowning]

"Round all these blissninnies up, strip 'em naked and put 'em in rubber rooms with no sharp or hard objects so they can never hurt themselves."

NO! Put them rubber room with LOTS of sharp and hard objects, lets get it over with quickly.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Times change people and so does the INTENT OF THE LAW.

Human nature doesn't change. Law can be rewritten, but the intent remains the intent—except, of course, in leftist extremist never-never land.