Expert Actress on Gun Control

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bon_Croix
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, it is a perfect analogy, you just refuse or are incapable of seeing and just injecting emotion rather than logic into the process.
 
😂

Buddy, I think 5 year olds should be able to walk into a hardware store and buy a gun with cash with no background check.

You are the one who can’t realize a bad analogy and just repeat tired arguments that other people push.

Go further up in the thread and see the pictures of my guns if you want some proof.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes my own side makes me wish I had a lower ACT score in high school so I’d fit in better.
 
True. He needs to stay safe. The official Catholic view is that a weapon in the home for household defence is okay. But Pope Francis has been quietly appointing American Bishops in support of Gun Control. And the goal is eventual eradication of guns in society, except for Police and Military. I meant to illustrate the absurdity of undue attachments to killing machines. We Catholics need to stand up for strides toward safety.
 
Not American so such conversations are rather amusing to me, but I’m just curious about what Republicans propose to stop gun related deaths. From what I see, they are just proposing better FBI checks.

Is there anything else?

Edit to add: what are concrete steps to take to avoid mass shootings as well as other unfortunate incidents (e.g. Someone shooting the other in gang fights, when a girl rejects him etc)?
 
Last edited:
But if the solution is everyone has to give up their rights and you only cut the amount by half. You have accomplished nothing.
 
So I will not trade barbs, Just so I understand your thoughts, are you saying we need to blame the gun or the person?
 
I think his point is that yes, people kill people, but a gun sure makes it a lot easier.
 
The person. But that comparing guns to cars is stupid. Cars are not made with the express purpose of being a tool used to kill. Their primary use is transportation.

A guns primary purpose is to render living things dead. That is not inherently bad, some people need deaded. It is a neutral tool, the user determines if the life it takes is for good or bad.
 
Last edited:
A large amount of violent crime is related to the drug trade. Legalize drugs, institute mandatory drug testing for welfare, and encourage discrimination against those who use and deal drugs. The problem will solve itself.
 
philipl said:
But if the solution is everyone has to give up their rights and you only cut the amount by half. You have accomplished nothing.
Click to expand...
Cutting deaths by half is accomplishing nothing? I’ll remember that next time someone says the late-term abortion ban will make a difference.
 
As usual we have wandered off.🙃
Given the efficiency of the tool used should we be thankful the death count is lower.
 
Bon_Croix said:
Look at below headline. All of a sudden this girl is an expert on U.S. and State Gun Laws.

‘Big Bang Theory’ star Mayim Bialik slams NRA, calls for ‘civil disobedience’ to change gun laws
Click to expand...
Would that be ironic if, the star`s purposed disobedience resulted in more deaths.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
The person. But that comparing guns to cars is stupid. Cars are not made with the express purpose of being a tool used to kill. Their primary use is transportation.

A guns primary purpose is to render living things dead. That is not inherently bad, some people need deaded. It is a neutral tool, the user determines if the life it takes is for good or bad.
Click to expand...
I am not sure that “express purpose” is the essential criteria to be used to determine lethality. There are many things that are far more lethal to more people than a gun, that were not expressly purposed to kill, but can effectively be used to do so.

A loaded gasoline truck could be far more lethal to more people than even an automatic weapon, and in the wrong hands would accomplish far more carnage.

Why would “express purpose” necessarily be the crucial criteria? Things can have far more uses than they were expressly designed for. Jet airliners flown into skyscrapers, would be one archetypical example that would argue against your point.

More crucially, cars and jets are already very highly regulated, even more so than guns precisely because they do pose high risks.

The question then would be: Precisely what level of regulation ought to be in place for guns and for what reasons?

Clearly, mere regulation isn’t the solution because many people still die as a result of vehicular mishaps and airline crashes. Not every issue can be solved by more regulation.
 
Last edited:
JanSobieskiIII said:
Sometimes my own side makes me wish I had a lower ACT score in high school so I’d fit in better.
Click to expand...
It would be funnier if you wished for a lower ASVAB score.

Where do you rank? Puddle pirate or crayon eater? I’m rather fond of crayola myself.
 
Last edited:
Sadly I was never allowe the honor to serve. MEPS wouldn’t let me through. I did score an 86 on it I’m remembering correctly. But that was 10 years ago almost so i may be wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top