ExiledInIllinois Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I drive a car legally because I have to. I don't have to tie it in... You just did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I don't have to tie it in... You just did. So your point is that anything registered is public knowledge so making a map of it and posting that on some site is ok. Is that your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 (edited) The proliferation of high firepower arms is becoming a problem. It is perfectly legal and just to infringe on the Second.... Just as it is perfectly just and legal to infringe on the First when speech becomes destructive. Edited December 28, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 The proliferation of high firepower arms is becoming a problem. It is perfectly legal and just to infringe on the Second.... Just as it is perfectly just and legal to infringe on the First when speech becomes destructive. It is?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 So your point is that anything registered is public knowledge so making a map of it and posting that on some site is ok. Is that your point? No. We are not an absolute society. Sorry, if the poor gun owners are feeling picked on. I addressed before the need to curtail the ultimate asset that a gun represents. There needs to some liability w/gun ownership in an age of rapidly advancing firepower. This stigmatization gives ownership a bit of liability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 No. We are not an absolute society. Sorry, if the poor gun owners are feeling picked on. I addressed before the need to curtail the ultimate asset that a gun represents. There needs to some liability w/gun ownership in an age of rapidly advancing firepower. This stigmatization gives ownership a bit of liability. Please explain "rapidly advancing firepower". This is going to be a hoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 K. Would you not say a massacre of 28 people in CT is mass destruction for those family and loved ones? So yes. So yes, a Bushwacker can be classified as a weapon of mass destruction. How do you define "mass". 3000, two buildings or psychological destruction of a community along with 28 people? Wrong. Well it'd good to see you come around and agree that Iraq harbored millions of WMD's. What's a Bushwacker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Well it'd good to see you come around and agree that Iraq harbored millions of WMD's. What's a Bushwacker? I always did. I just didn't think it was worth our time to go for those WMD's... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Exhiled, do you think your "Bushwacker" is more powerful than a Henry or more lethal than a Gatling Gun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Exhiled, do you think your "Bushwacker" is more powerful than a Henry or more lethal than a Gatling Gun? No. But it is easily accessible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I always did. I just didn't think it was worth our time to go for those WMD's... If I used my Swiss Army knife to carve up 30 children and end their lives would that knife be a WMD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 :lol: You're an idiot. And you're a hypocrite. You whine incessantly about insults but you just can't stop yourself the second you see an opportunity. I remember, not so long ago, when you whined because I used your name (Eric) on this board, complaining about your privacy. I can dig up those PMs, if you'd like. I probably still have them somewhere. Not like he (AD) hasn't been told that for many years now. AD just falls on that tired old excuse. Ever notice he can't talk about sh*t. So he rips people and gets all ticky tacky. You're absolutely amazing. I point out your ridiculous lack of command because it's a symptom of both your laziness and stupidity. You want people to take you seriously but you wouldn't be able to put a cogent thought down if your children's lives depended on it. I applaud you for sticking to your "AD never talks about anything", despite the insane amount of contrarian data that's available using the search feature on this very message board. Do I insult you and the other retards far more often than I put down wisdom? You bet. BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU (and they) DESERVE. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. Even you, with your menial education and skills, should be able to process it. You don't even grasp basic concepts. You're nothing more than a parrot. If this kind of **** continues, some criminal is going to use the information to break into one of these homes, steal a weapon, then use it to commit a crime. I only hope that crime is perpetuated against someone like you - someone who doesn't see what the big deal is. Some people have to learn the hard way. It's usually the shallow end of the intellectual pool, where you've been smashing your head against the floor since you crawled out from wherever you came. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 The government gets involved in a lot of things. They regulate tobacco and alcohol. Should we also have maps showing who smokes and drinks in your neighborhood? Can that map also include a cross reference to Chiapet and Billy Bass owners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 See that is all you got. Can't talk about the topic @ hand... So you resort to this BS. Of course you can't argue, so you stomp your feet like a 2 year old. Happens all the time 3rd with you... Now go run away if you can't play nice. I do not know what you guys are pissing and moaning about... You have a right to bear arms... Nobody is stopping you from bearing the ones that are decided FOR YOU... And how they are resistered and kept track of by other members of the public. Again... what is the problem... No need to get your panties in a twist. My response is in two parts: First, I don't think you understand what the intrinsic properties of a thing are that make it a right, as opposed to a privilege. What is the difference between the two concepts, EII? Second, if something can be justly infringed upon, it isn't a right. Your response is no different than a member of the KKK in the 1950's saying that you have the right to be any color, as long as it's a color the majority of society approves of. It's no different than the early Catholic Church and it's Holy Inquisition. It's no different than policing and restricting thought, or speech. It's no different than a Southern slave owner holding as truth that all people have rights, as long as they are white men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 My response is in two parts: First, I don't think you understand what the intrinsic properties of a thing are that make it a right, as opposed to a privilege. What is the difference between the two concepts, EII? Second, if something can be justly infringed upon, it isn't a right. Your response is no different than a member of the KKK in the 1950's saying that you have the right to be any color, as long as it's a color the majority of society approves of. It's no different than the early Catholic Church and it's Holy Inquisition. It's no different than policing and restricting thought, or speech. It's no different than a Southern slave owner holding as truth that all people have rights, as long as they are white men. Dude, ask him about gay marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Dude, ask him about gay marriage. Oh God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted December 28, 2012 Author Share Posted December 28, 2012 Please explain "rapidly advancing firepower". This is going to be a hoot. I love when you do this and then a person posts back with an actual definition or a linked article to back up their position and you come back with "no, you have to do it in your own words". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I love when you do this and then a person posts back with an actual definition or a linked article to back up their position and you come back with "no, you have to do it in your own words". Posting Op Ed pieces does not a logical argument make. It's cop out to issue a reading assignment rather than engage in a discussion. It's an absurdity to believe the two are interchangable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted December 28, 2012 Author Share Posted December 28, 2012 Posting Op Ed pieces does not a logical argument make. It's cop out to issue a reading assignment rather than engage in a discussion. It's an absurdity to believe the two are interchangable. That's why when I post a link while defending my stand point I generally will post a link to a Wikipedia article or other form of study with statistical data that can be traced back to find where it came from. The cop out comes from people, when unable to compete with facts, coming back with "you have to say it in your own words". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 Ethical and philisophical arguments are in no way bolstered by sourced artiticles or encyclopidia entries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts