Why do liberals hate guns? II

Until it comes to SCOTUS again, some States are banning weapons based on looks making those that own them either give them up or become felons by owning a gun that is legal one day and illegal the next.

 

You have clearly changed my mind. I loved how you started by calling your opponent stupid. That fires up the base. Nothing like feeling smarter than someone. Another point for generalizing all "law-abiding citizens." My digression, I find it amazing that so many gang members are killed just after they switched from following the law. One more thing, but the two word GIF's designed to emotionally and not logically manipulate people was the clincher. Great argument. You should say the exact same thing to the five conservative justices on the Supreme Court. I'm sure one will strike it down eventually.

 

How many arrests so far?

 

Nobody can see that it is fear that drives most people reactions to the topic of guns. Most rightist fear that they will need to use it to protect themselves from the "black menace.' Leftists fear that "right wing crazies" will start shooting everybody.

Can anyone not see that this is a way to keep us buying guns and lining the pockets of politicians pockets, or voting Democrat and giving them even more power?

Do you really think the politicians really care if we kill ourselves? They don't share these fears. They just keep playing with ours and our prejudices while they do whatever they want, and no one sees it because they our on "their" side.

 

Well, that statement is certainly racist. I don't know of anyone and specifically anyone on the right that owns a gun because they want to protect themselves from the "black menace". They own them to protect themselves and their families from harm no matter where it comes from.

 

I most certainly have seen them today on this forum. I have never seen people that will fail to see another side, even if it is intellectually stated. Call me a racist if you want, maybe it rubs off. I have never seen such ignorance or hatred as that which is spouted here.

I know though that they expect to protect themselves from whoever comes, but tell me that you truly believe that a lot of them don't think that it will be a black they have to protect themselves from. With all their statistics on blacks that commit violent crimes, they don't fear it will be them next? Call it stereotyping if you want, for that to have been a racist statement it would be the whites that I hate. Or maybe you didn't get the reference to the "red scare", I was implying the "black menace" was like that. The government and media perpetuation that a group are armed and dangerous and trying to get you.

 

Where? In the previous thread, I didn't see much mention from any "Left Wingers" to take guns from law-abiding citizens. Smart gun control isn't about total confiscation. It's about making sure that those who are most likely to use it for harm don't have access to them.

But, the problem is that everyone thinks they're the good guy.

 

Well, I don't think like. I have run into some pretty scary white guys in my time. The statistics show that most black crime is black on black and most crime is due to either gangs or drugs. Since I don't hang around gangs or drugs, I would think I have less of a chance to be a victim of that though a good friend of mine, a liberal that hates guns, was robbed at his front door by gunpoint by a black guy with a few more waiting in a car.

 

They exist. Go to some areas of Texas. They are rare, but just as rare as the utopian left who believe banning all guns is possible. NRA made a lot of money peddling that lie after Obama was elected. I remember standing at a Cheaper Than Dirt in Fort Worth, TX after he was elected. Completely slammed, Fox News on three TV's, and the shelves emptier than grocery stores before a hurricane. Those people aren't in that store if Sarah Palin, Wayne LaPierre, and Glenn Beck report the boring story. The Second Amendment is safe. Two Supreme Court cases affirmed the right to self-defense, and even incorporated it to the states.

 

Unfortunately, Sir, it won't happen.'94 should have been their Waterloo, but like bad pennies, the bustards continue to crap in the face of America.

 

Answer: Both of them.

 

Simple. Because they create more problems then they solve.

For the gun lovers, I have a simple question:
I was walking down a deserted street a few weeks ago when out of nowhere a couple of guys with guns came over, pointed it at me and took away some valuables. This happened in the blink of an eye and they had a gun pointed at me before I could have done anything including taking out a gun even if I had one.
If I had a gun though, what could I have done to save myself? Having the gun in the criminals hands certainly gave them an advantage and they probably would not have been able to commit the crime without it. So yes guns are the problem and maybe the solution is not a complete ban on guns but strong gun control is indeed mandatory.

 

Then there is the fellow in the other thread who saved a store full of people by being armed concealed carry who shot and killed an armed man during a hold up. Weapons give BOTH criminals and honest citizens an edge. But If you remove weapons from the hands of honest citizens -- or go as radical in gun control as much of the Left wants -- then effectively ONLY criminals have an edge because they are -- you know -- people who are going to be armed even if every honest citizen in this nation has been disarmed by the self-defense phobic Left. Ooops!

 

So have your non sequiturs, which are usually considered fallacies.

- - - Updated - - -

And, you still don't seem to have a Cause or a clue as to the social dilemmas involved.

 

We may be the Only republic to have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge, but no anti-hypocrisy laws on the books. Is it a correlation or a coincidence?

- - - Updated - - -

Well, in that Case, I can't be wrong when you Only have fallacy for your Cause.

 

Still spamming the board eh Daniel? Why not try to inject a little wisdom for a change?

 

Nope! I did my stopping of violence within our borders from without.

 

I don't!

Don't watch FOX either. I am up and around and note your post is arrogantly wrong, period!

Still don't watch utube. Why did you make that video?

Nope, that is what your imagination is about.

So far you have missed on everything you have posted, and you posted it in an arrogant manner.

BTW, I am a moderate democrat, and I don't buy your left wing nut drivel.

 

It may not be in the thread, but left wing nuts would like nothing more than to take all the guns from civilians and one of their favorite blog sites, KOS, talks about it.

 

You could have done what a guy in Dothan, AL did a few years ago. When 2 hoods stuck a gun through his car window and demanded his wallet, he said ok, reached down as if to get it, and shot both of them before they could blink. Guns save the lives.

 

If we purpose to alleviate poverty and ignorance, the benefits derived will be exponentially greater than flooding our society with implements of death.

 

Of course the two issues are totally unrelated. Lawful owning of firearms has nothing to do with the prosperity of our society, and we can all agree that implements of death in the hands of criminals is always bad social policy. Why don't we all work to eliminate firearms from the hands of criminals instead of trying to deprive law abiding citizens of their rights to keep and bear arms? If we devoted half as much energy going after the real criminals maybe there wouldn't be so many?

 

That's a part of the overall problem. Too many people think exactly as you do.

 

So you don't agree that criminals with firearms is a problem. Unfortunately there are many who believe as you do that criminals with firearms is not a problem.

 

That is only 'part' of the problem in this society. That is what I was suggesting indirectly.

You assumed wrongly.

Also, more can be improved via education and reducing poverty... than flooding this society with additional firearms.