- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How do so many Americans have a fundamental misunderstanding of the 2nd amendment?
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:36 pm to BamaAtl
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:36 pm to BamaAtl
Which of the plethora of logical fallacies that you constantly use is your favorite?
Can you make a single argument without using logical fallacies or emotions?
Can you make a single argument without using logical fallacies or emotions?
This post was edited on 2/18/18 at 6:37 pm
1
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:37 pm to BamaAtl
When your party can competently talk guns and not use the words clip or ghost then maybe we can try to have a conversation. You progs don’t know anything about guns but want to ban the scary ones just because.
The same party that says we can’t impose voter ID laws due to unfair burdens are the same loons that have no problems imposing more burdens on the 2A
The same party that says we can’t impose voter ID laws due to unfair burdens are the same loons that have no problems imposing more burdens on the 2A
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:39 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
I'm not selling my guns back to the government
Nobody's forcing you to. (that's the point)
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:39 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
Give us your gun laws you think are going to all of a sudden make criminals not kill people.
It's not about making criminals not kill people, it's about making it harder for them to obtain the means to do so. Obviously.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:41 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
I already linked one, champ. But under your view of the 2nd Amendment, shouldn't said laws be unconstitutional? Why haven't you challenged them? Why can't I buy a nuke, given the 2nd Amendment is absolute in your eyes?
AGAIN, a nuclear weapon is not a firearm. Your argument is to ban the AR platform apparently. The AR platform has literally the same exact design and functions identically to a pistol. I'll let you figure out the key differences between pistols, rifles, AR's, and nukes there and decide for yourself which one is the outlier. I'm sure that a highly intelligent guy with such a high IQ like yourself can figure that one out.
quote:
17 people is a small town. 500 injured and 50 dead is a pretty good sized town back in 1776. But you're perfectly fine with the means to kill that many and more, on a whim.
Wow
not even sure how to respond to this level of mental gymnastics. quote:
My point - which you still won't get (your next post will prove that point) - is that we already have limits on the right of the citizenry to own any and all types of weapons. We have already decided, as a nation, that the 2nd Amendment is not absolute. We are not legally able to own any weapon we want for whatever purpose we want. Given that, why not implement some tougher gun laws that we know can save lives? There's no harm in that, just lives saved.
Yea, I understand that already. It shouldn't be absolute when you have objects that are capable of killing millions of people at once and causing shockwaves of economic and environmental destruction simultaneously. An AR-15 is not one of those things so...yea. Your argument to ban the AR platform is centered completely around a scatterbrained fringe lunatic argument about nukes being illegal. You are a very stupid person.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:41 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Can you make a single argument without using logical fallacies or emotions?
Sure. Few guns mean fewer gun deaths. My position would save lives. That's not emotion, that's fact.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:41 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Nobody's forcing you to. (that's the point)
Which proves it's a bullshite plan that will have little or no effect on crime and gun murder.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:43 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
It's not about making criminals not kill people, it's about making it harder for them to obtain the means to do so. Obviously.
There's thousands of laws on the books already designed to do just that but somehow they keep getting guns. It couldn't possibly be because criminals don't follow laws, huh?
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:46 pm to LSUgrad08112
The founding fathers let private citizens arm ships with cannons. armed warships were there most powerful weapons of the time, the equivalent of letting private citizens have nukes
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:46 pm to LSUgrad08112
quote:
AGAIN, a nuclear weapon is not a firearm.
Like frick it isn't - a Davy Crockett is a firearm.
quote:
Your argument is to ban the AR platform apparently.
It's not.
quote:
I'll let you figure out the key differences between pistols, rifles, AR's, and nukes
One is banned by US law, and the others aren't, and you're struggling to define why without violating your ignorant beliefs.
quote:
not even sure how to respond to this level of mental gymnastics.
I wasn't looking for a response, just to make you look like more of an idiot. Thanks for complying.
quote:
It shouldn't be absolute when you have objects that are capable of killing millions of people at once and causing shockwaves of economic and environmental destruction simultaneously.
Where in the 2nd Amendment does it add those qualifiers? What if killing millions of people at once and causing 'shockwaves of economic and environmental destruction simultaneously' (side note - isn't that Scott Pruitt's job these days?) is what I need to keep my well-trained militia sharp and honed for battle against the big bad gubmint? Who are you to take away my Founder-given rights?!
quote:
An AR-15 is not one of those things
Tell that to the 17 people who died last week in a Florida high school.
quote:
Your argument to ban the AR platform
Not my argument. Never been my argument. Glad you could grace us with that little bit of your 'much, much' bigger intellect there, little buddy.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:47 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Sure. Few guns mean fewer gun deaths. My position would save lives. That's not emotion, that's fact.
the afferming the consequent logical fallacy. So 1/2 is 50% which is still a fail.
If there are less of x than of course there will be less of your
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:47 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
it's a bullshite plan that will have little or no effect on crime and gun murder.
Every other developed country in the world disagrees.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:47 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Few guns mean fewer gun deaths.
But not fewer deaths in general.
quote:
My position would save lives.
And it would also take away the lives of people who could potentially use an AR to fend off multiple home invaders or intruders. AR's are very, very rarely used in gun violence, even including Florida. I can assure you that they're at a net positive on innocent lives saved vs. innocent lives taken.
quote:
That's not emotion, that's fact.
False. It's a poorly researched and poorly thought out emotional response to a complicated situation.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:48 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Every other developed country in the world disagrees.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:48 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
There's thousands of laws on the books already designed to do just that but somehow they keep getting guns.
If your argument that laws to prevent crimes are ineffective, why have any laws at all? Do you think there would be more murders if murder were legal, or fewer? What about rapes? Robberies? Drunk driving incidents?
That's not possibly your argument, you just didn't realize when you made it that it makes you sound like a dumbass. Hopefully now you know better. You're welcome!
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:49 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Like frick it isn't - a Davy Crockett is a firearm.
A fricking experimental weapon platform that was deemed unsafe and scrapped.
sweet example fig. So many logical fallacies. So little time
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:49 pm to LSUgrad08112
Bravo, well stated and dead on target. 2 amendment “right to bear arms” against tierany and an over bearing government which has gotten completly out of control.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:50 pm to BamaAtl
quote:site me any country that has done this and displayed any positive effect of crime, violent crime, or even murder rate.
Every other developed country in the world disagrees
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:50 pm to BamaAtl
quote:So more laws to break will make people like the cockbag that shot up the school realize he shouldn't do it?
That's not possibly your argument, you just didn't realize when you made it that it makes you sound like a dumbass. Hopefully now you know better. You're welcome!
fricking idiot.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:51 pm to LSUgrad08112
quote:
But not fewer deaths in general.
Yes, fewer deaths in general.
quote:
And it would also take away the lives of people who could potentially use an AR to fend off multiple home invaders or intruders.
That almost never happens. Why are you so fixated on your AR, is that your sex toy for the month? That how you show your manhood, by having a big boy gun as your little spoon?
quote:
I can assure you that they're at a net positive on innocent lives saved vs. innocent lives taken.
You can assure me, but you'd be incorrect. As with so many things in life, apparently.
quote:
It's a poorly researched and poorly thought out emotional response to a complicated situation.
No, it's backed by mountains of research that all demonstrate my point as accurate (and disprove yours, but we already knew that). Enough research that someone could even do a meta-analysis on it in the last few years. How neat is that! You're not just wrong, you're "we have so much data we can run an analysis ON THE INDIVIDUAL STUDIES TOGETHER" wrong.
This post was edited on 2/18/18 at 6:52 pm
Page 9 of 28
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News