The end game of gun control

Discussion in 'Politics' started by fhl, Jan 31, 2011.

  1. fhl

    fhl

    Your comments are like an advertisement for the need of the 2nd ammendment.

    You think people who don't share your views are contemptable, and that they shouldn't be allowed to own guns, they are lesser than people than you and, obviously, that you should be in power over them telling them what they can and can't do.

    So tell me, ghoul, should i be allowed to live?
     
    #11     Jan 31, 2011
  2. Dude, honestly, are you capable of logic?

    When did I ever say that I am for or against the 2nd amendment and/or gun control? When did I ever say that people who don't share my views shouldn't be allowed to own guns? When did I ever say that I should be in power and tell anyone what they can and can't do? Finally, when did I ever express a view about you deserving to live or not? Did you even read what I actually said?

    Let me repeat. The only thing I have said was that the particular argument you quoted was silly and had no merit whatsoever.
     
    #12     Jan 31, 2011
  3. fhl

    fhl

    How about your very first comment on this thread, when you stated unequivacally that people who held the views expressed in the op shouldn't be allowed to own guns.

    And you tell me I'm not capable of logic. lol

    I'm through with you.

    Goodbye
     
    #13     Jan 31, 2011
  4. Firstly, you clearly failed to recognize that my comment was not addressed at you, but rather at the author whom you quoted. Secondly, I also said that the person who made this argument and specifically referred to Soviet dissidents (i.e. the author) "lacks a functioning brain". Did you take that seriously also? I was hoping that such exaggeration on my part would be sufficient to communicate the irony, but, sadly, it was not meant to be. It's not the first time my sense of humour fails me.
     
    #14     Jan 31, 2011
  5. pspr

    pspr

    Martin, your posts have strangely become more illogical over the weeks. Or have I just over estimated your acumin?

    To say that disarming a populace who was subsequently annihilated has no relationship or basis in logic with regards to gun control is an illogical statement in itself.
     
    #15     Jan 31, 2011
  6. pspr

    pspr

    I think your statement confirms the OP's conclusion.
     
    #16     Jan 31, 2011
  7. Thanks for sharing your interesting opinions.
     
    #17     Jan 31, 2011
  8. BSAM

    BSAM

    Oh my. It's amazing how people take a group of facts and distort reality to pretend that they have a point. Of course, it's easier for a government to kill large groups of people, once that government has taken away all the weapons.

    But, if they wanted to kill those people, they could have done it anyway. Don't you gun loonies get it??? It was just easier for those governments to start their killing while the other side was at the weakest point.

    Look at this: I give you a stick as your weapon. Then, I say that we are going to fight. But, I have an AR-15. Who do you think wins?

    If I don't even allow you a stick, who do you think wins?

    (Hope these questions aren't too hard for you.)

    Do you gun loonies think whatever guns and ammo you got would defeat the US government if an internal war broke out?

    I bet 99% of you who speak with such bravado on the internet would drop every shell you got if you looked out your window and saw a tank and 30 marines outside. And probably wet your pants at the same time.

    Wake up people. "Superman" and "Tarzan" were fictional characters.

    Good-Gosh-O-Mighty.....What are you smoking?
     
    #18     Jan 31, 2011
  9. If it comes after me it's not my government. And, yes, a lot of people would try. If I recall correctly, you're from SoCal, right? A different attitude than some other places in the country.
     
    #19     Jan 31, 2011
  10. Eight

    Eight

    Wow, Stalin was able to capture and kill a small number of officers who were armed.
     
    #20     Jan 31, 2011