Reply to 75,000 Pro-Gun Demonstrators in Richmond For "Lobby Day"?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "75,000 Pro-Gun Demonstrators in Richmond For "Lobby Day"?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Uh huh. Sure.

So we're all still waiting on that post where a gun rights supporter says they want "deranged and crazy people to be armed"

Stilllllllllll waiting.

Yawn. [/quote]

If you are ok with [i]anyone[/i] getting a gun then you are ok with crazy people getting guns.

Do YOU support universal background checks? Do YOU support red flag laws? 
[/quote]

Nah. Your ridiculous oversimplification here fools no one. You were asked to prove your assertion that gun rights proponents specifically said they wanted "crazy" and "deranged" persons to be armed. You said they posted those exact words on a post somewhere in this 32 page thread . You were asked to find that post, and quote it. That's all. That's the ONLY thing you had to do.

But that post doesn't exist. It never did.

So you had to set about moving those goalposts.... again. Like always.

"Well, if you're not for ________, it basically MEANS you're in favor of ______, even if you don't actually say as much"

No. Doesn't work like that. And I think you should apologize now and admit you were wrong, because that's the adult thing to do.

Now, as to your argument - you simply won't find gun rights proponents advocating for "crazy" or "deranged" or otherwise dangerously mentally ill people to be armed. Period. But being opposed to universal background checks doesn't equate to the same thing. Sorry, it just doesn't. There are some very good reasons for being opposed to UBC's, and none involve the idea of wanting crazy people armed. Until you stop conflating the two notions, you are imposing limits on yourself in your ability to see other sides of the argument. And that is intellectually unsound. [/quote]

I'm sorry you're having trouble following the thread, pops, but I never said "they posted those exact words". FYI - DP means "different poster" - you are confusing posters.

Here's exactly what I wrote:
[i]"DP. Not too far back [u]someone said that they don’t want UBC[/u]...basically advocating that ANYONE (even crazy and deranged people) should have a gun."[/i]

And then I gave the timestamp for the person who said they don't want UBC.

So feel free to apologize to [i]me[/i] once you figure that all out.

In the mean time....

Background checks and red flag laws DO help to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. If you don't like them for whatever reason then please suggest an alternative. How would you like to ensure that crazy/deranged people don't get guns? Or do you think that ANYONE should be able to get a gun? 
[/quote]

UBC  and  red flag laws would eventually keep guns out  of the hands  of alll  people.  That  is the problem.

Here  - read up on  why UBC  isn't needed and would not  work.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/against-universal-background-checks/

The poster above outlined the issues with the red flag laws.  In addition, they  are  unconstitutional.  [/quote]

Do you think anyone at anytime should be able to get a gun?

[/quote]

No.  We have laws to prevent felons and other from getting weapons.  
Do you believe there  are  no background checks in place already?[/quote]

Felon walks into a gun show. Should he be allowed to buy a gun without a background check? 
[/quote]

No.  But, if I wish to gift my firearm to my age-eligible son or daughter, I should not have to  conduct a background check.  [/quote]

So you're OK requiring background checks at gun shows then?

Another scenario - your neighbor wants to gift a firearm to his felon son. No background check for him? 
[/quote]

NP here.  What you do not seem to comprehend about these background checks is that they are a form of registration that forever LINKS a person's identity with the firearm.

That type of permanent gun database can (and has) been used for confiscation in many places - including California (and DC before that).

Besides, if something is a RIGHT, then why must I register for it FIRST?

Not to mention:  transfers in VA already happen only after the seller asks the buyer if they are allowed to receive the gun.  So it is already taken care of. [/quote]

1. You want to rely on the word of the buyer? 
2. It’s potentially a record of the purchase, not a registration. 
3. If it did feed into a registry at some point that’d be a great way to track down straw purchasers. 
4. Registering itself would not infringe on your civil liberties (voting). 
[b]5. Are you against all background checks? [/b]

[/quote]

Would still love to know if you are against ALL background checks...

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics