Should America have gun control?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"I'm not the topic of discussion.  If you have any comments to make about gun control, please do."

What about the below questions?


What do you think that the victims of gun violence value more?

The second amendment, or if they could get their family members back, who were taken away from them, because of an offenders gun violence?  

TTKDB

Would it be unfair or fair, to say that the various offenders in the country today, who have maybe, used their weapons to commit their various crimes with, maybe value their individual weapons, more than an a community maybe values it's peace and quiet? 

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

Would it be unfair or fair, to say that the various offenders in the country today, who have maybe, used their weapons to commit their various crimes with, maybe value their individual weapons, more than an a community maybe values it's peace and quiet? 

I'm not sure, but it WOULD be irrelevant to the topic, which, once again, is gun control.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Why no response from you on these questions CYDdharta?

What about the below questions?

What do you think that the victims of gun violence value more?

The second amendment, or if they could get their family members back, who were taken away from them, because of an offenders gun violence? 
 
A probable guess, you can't speak for how those others, may view the gun control questions, outside of your own pro gun narratives, right CYDdharta? 

(Would it be unfair or fair, to say that the various offenders in the country today, who have maybe, used their weapons to commit their various crimes with, maybe value their individual weapons, more than an a community maybe values it's peace and quiet?)

"I'm not sure, but it WOULD be irrelevant to the topic, which, once again, is gun control."

Criminals killing innocent people with their guns is relevant in this "gun control" question environment.

The criminals and their gun violence crimes, have pulled the thousands of cities, towns, and the various states across the United States into the gun control conversational, because of their murderous ways.

(Or might you protest that point of view?)

So yes, it's a part of the gun control conversational debate. 

John_C_87

The United States Constitutions preamble is gun control. The United States of America has always had gun control. What no Nation holds is crime control as a united state, that is the reasons behind a more perfect union of principle, a United State not a most popular state.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Why no response from you on these questions CYDdharta?

What about the below questions?

What do you think that the victims of gun violence value more?

The second amendment, or if they could get their family members back, who were taken away from them, because of an offenders gun violence? 
 
A probable guess, you can't speak for how those others, may view the gun control questions, outside of your own pro gun narratives, right CYDdharta? 

(Would it be unfair or fair, to say that the various offenders in the country today, who have maybe, used their weapons to commit their various crimes with, maybe value their individual weapons, more than an a community maybe values it's peace and quiet?)

"I'm not sure, but it WOULD be irrelevant to the topic, which, once again, is gun control."

Criminals killing innocent people with their guns is relevant in this "gun control" question environment.

The criminals and their gun violence crimes, have pulled the thousands of cities, towns, and the various states across the United States into the gun control conversational, because of their murderous ways.

(Or might you protest that point of view?)

So yes, it's a part of the gun control conversational debate. 

I did respond, I said "I'm not sure, but it WOULD be irrelevant to the topic, which, once again, is gun control."

Whether or not criminals like the 2nd Amendment is as irrelevant as whether or not they like football or whether or not they like ice cream.

Do you have anything to add on the topic of gun control??????????

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"I did respond, I said "I'm not sure, but it WOULD be irrelevant to the topic, which, once again, is gun control.

Whether or not criminals like the 2nd Amendment is as irrelevant as whether or not they like football or whether or not they like ice cream.

Do you have anything to add on the topic of gun control?"

Your above response, I'm sorry to say, isn't an answer.

The second amendment, should, and ought to be reflective, of how the offenders, and career criminals, keep abusing it day in and day out, year after year, with their societal abuse of innocent people, in this country because of their sickening gun violance, regardless of how some of the pro gun crowd, (with all due respect) may feel about the second amendment from their individual pro weapons platforms? 

Another alternative point of view:
The Second Amendment, doesn't in a sense, belong to some of the pro weapons individuals exclusively, it belongs to the country as a whole. 

And because of that, the gun control conversation, deserves to be had from multiple tiers of conversations, and not just in a sense, in a box, from how some of the weapons owners appear to keep trying to verbally steer it? 

It deserves a national conversation, from the various points of view, of the various survivors, of the gun violence situations, that made them victims, to begin with.

The survivors of an offenders gun violence, are the premier witnesses that can speak on gun violence first hand.

They deserve to have a platform, to speak on the second amendment, and on gun control as well.

And the Second Amendment, deserves to be reflective because of the gun violence survivors, and to the rest of a peaceful seeking public as a whole.

TTKDB

"A Killer on Floor 32 l Watch the FULL Documentary"

An excerpt from the documentary:

"Published on Dec 19, 2018

A Killer on Floor 32 takes you inside the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history using never before seen footage, and exclusive access to tell the story of that tragic night in Las Vegas."

Alec

@YeshuaBought

What is your stance on guns?  Do you want all guns banned, or just semi automatics?

Evidence

Oh Yeah America should have Gun Control, I mean just look at this, who can say No?



If you own a gun, for Pete sakes learn how to control it!

Zombieguy1987

TTKDB said:

"A Killer on Floor 32 l Watch the FULL Documentary"

Do you realize people will rarely look at your videos right?

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

Why would you trouble yourself to write the below statement over that video, unless you're maybe worried, over your individual view of the second amendment, being talked about differently, from your individual narrative?

What about that video is possibly troubling to you? 

The video is about moments in history, that are engrained in the very history of this country. 

"Do you realize people will rarely look at your videos right?"

Alec

Guns provide protection against the potential of there being a tyrannical government.  If you think a tyrannical government won't ever form in the US, then how do you think about Donald Trump?

John_C_87

@Alec ;
It is Fire-Arms provide a common defense to the general welfare. Tyrannical Government is not limited to political influence o people as a whole truth.

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

What does this comment from you, have to do with the theme of the forum? 

"Do you realize people will rarely look at your videos right?"

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"I did respond, I said "I'm not sure, but it WOULD be irrelevant to the topic, which, once again, is gun control.

Whether or not criminals like the 2nd Amendment is as irrelevant as whether or not they like football or whether or not they like ice cream.

Do you have anything to add on the topic of gun control?"

Your above response, I'm sorry to say, isn't an answer.

The second amendment, should, and ought to be reflective, of how the offenders, and career criminals, keep abusing it day in and day out, year after year, with their societal abuse of innocent people, in this country because of their sickening gun violance, regardless of how some of the pro gun crowd, (with all due respect) may feel about the second amendment from their individual pro weapons platforms? 

Another alternative point of view:
The Second Amendment, doesn't in a sense, belong to some of the pro weapons individuals exclusively, it belongs to the country as a whole. 

And because of that, the gun control conversation, deserves to be had from multiple tiers of conversations, and not just in a sense, in a box, from how some of the weapons owners appear to keep trying to verbally steer it? 

It deserves a national conversation, from the various points of view, of the various survivors, of the gun violence situations, that made them victims, to begin with.

The survivors of an offenders gun violence, are the premier witnesses that can speak on gun violence first hand.

They deserve to have a platform, to speak on the second amendment, and on gun control as well.

And the Second Amendment, deserves to be reflective because of the gun violence survivors, and to the rest of a peaceful seeking public as a whole.

My reply was, indeed, an answer.  When are you going to finally comprehend that feelings are completely irrelevant to the law???  What criminals think about guns makes no difference to anything. What you feel the 2nd Amendment should say matters not one whit.  The wording of the 2nd Amendment is clear and has been substantiated by the Supreme Court.  If you would like to redefine it, there is an amendment process you'll have to go through. 

Then again, the 2nd Amendment isn't a problem.  Guns aren't even a problem.  Criminals are the problem.  If you keep the focus where it belongs, and rational, you'll support initiatives that may actually help, like stiffer penalties.  If you lose focus, you'll support garbage legislation that won't do anything, like the crap Hogg promotes.

As for victims getting a national platform; as long as they're anti-gun, they'll get all the camera time and print space they could want.  The only victims who DON'T get a platform are the ones who defended themselves and the ones who don't endorse the media's and the left's anti-gun agenda.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Feelings aren't irrelevant, a human being is going to have feelings, however differently you may feel about being a gun owner, but if you've somehow devoided yourself from having any feelings, to me that just sounds a bit odd?

"When are you going to finally comprehend that feelings are completely irrelevant to the law???  What criminals think about guns makes no difference to anything."

Why does any convict who's on parole have a gun on his person, when his parole officer, told him after, getting out of jail, if you are caught with a gun, in your possession, your going back to jail? 

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Then again, the 2nd Amendment isn't a problem.  Guns aren't even a problem.  Criminals are the problem.  If you keep the focus where it belongs, and rational, you'll support initiatives that may actually help, like stiffer penalties.  If you lose focus, you'll support garbage legislation that won't do anything, like the crap Hogg promotes."

Maybe in a sense, or to a degree, or by accident, could the 2nd Amendment itself, have inadvertently created some of the past and current, problem weapon issues, because of the millions of illegal, and legally purchased weapons, that are in the country?

How many gun stores have been robbed over the years? 

How many gun owners have been robbed as well? 

Any idea of how many of those stolen weapons have been recovered? 

How many illegaI and hot guns are sitting in an evidence lockup, waiting to be used as evidence against an offender at trial? 

Some of the guns in the country are able to tell stories? 

The 21 guns used by the Vegas shooter, they can tell a story can't they? 

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Feelings aren't irrelevant, a human being is going to have feelings, however differently you may feel about being a gun owner, but if you've somehow devoided yourself from having any feelings, to me that just sounds a bit odd?

"When are you going to finally comprehend that feelings are completely irrelevant to the law???  What criminals think about guns makes no difference to anything."

Why does any convict who's on parole have a gun on his person, when his parole officer, told him after, getting out of jail, if you are caught with a gun, in your possession, your going back to jail? 

There is a time and place for everything, including feelings.  They do NOT have a place when discussing laws and Constitutional Amendments.  Feeling as completely irrelevant when discussing laws, all they do is taint the discussion.  You are well aware of this, that's why you replied to my comment;

The only law-abiding weapons owners who have killed people were those who used their weapons in self-defense.  This happens hundreds of thousands to millions of times per year.  Gun control won't stop criminal misuse of firearms, but it will impede law-abiding gun owners from being able to defend themselves and others.  Feel free to explain how prohibiting people from being able to defend themselves is pro community, pro law, pro family, pro education, or pro United States of America.

The convict on parole has a gun because criminals commit crimes.  It's pretty self-evident.  It's also why law-abiding gun owners shouldn't be hampered by gun control.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"Then again, the 2nd Amendment isn't a problem.  Guns aren't even a problem.  Criminals are the problem.  If you keep the focus where it belongs, and rational, you'll support initiatives that may actually help, like stiffer penalties.  If you lose focus, you'll support garbage legislation that won't do anything, like the crap Hogg promotes."

Maybe in a sense, or to a degree, or by accident, could the 2nd Amendment itself, have inadvertently created some of the past and current, problem weapon issues, because of the millions of illegal, and legally purchased weapons, that are in the country?

How many gun stores have been robbed over the years? 

How many gun owners have been robbed as well? 

Any idea of how many of those stolen weapons have been recovered? 

How many illegaI and hot guns are sitting in an evidence lockup, waiting to be used as evidence against an offender at trial? 

Some of the guns in the country are able to tell stories? 

The 21 guns used by the Vegas shooter, they can tell a story can't they? 

Nope, there is no problem with the 2nd Amendment and guns aren't a problem.  Guns don't do anything.  Guns don't tell stories, they cannot talk. If there is a problem, it is a crime problem.  Keep the focus where it belongs, on the criminals.

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

There is a 2nd Amendment problem when it comes to guns. The problem is our right to own a gun comes from the United States Constitutional right granted to us as a united State. The 2nd Amendment is only a ratified amendment to that preamble. It is a democratic addition by vote. Meaning collection of fact as preamble with the introduction of a statute, or deed stating it purpose, aims, and justification may not actual be followed, or be part of its context.

In plain words the United States Constitution preamble itself must be obeyed or any Amendment to its change under its direction is an effort to alter truth, and whole truth in some way.

The 2nd Amendment is a short cut in only one direction of constitutional principle as it is describing a group’s right to orderly formation. This is a relationship to the 1st Amendment not Constitutional separation.

CYDdharta

Brilliant speech

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Nope, there is no problem with the 2nd Amendment and guns aren't a problem.

Yes, there is, it's being abused by the offenders, criminals, and the previous law abiding citizens who used their legal weapons to kill innocent people with them.

"Guns don't do anything."

Yes, they do, do things, they have been used by law enforcement, to protect and serve the public.

And they have been, used for years by offenders, criminals, and various first time offenders, who have committed murder/ suicides involving the youth, and other whole families, by using their weapons, to commit their various crimes with.

And the various offenders, who have used their weapons to kill some of the youth, and some of the teachers at schools, and at night clubs and concerts.

"Guns don't tell stories,"

Yes they do, that is what forensics is for.

"they cannot talk. If there is a problem, it is a crime problem."

Yes, they do, forensics.

"Keep the focus where it belongs, on the criminals."

The above, is a pro gun narrative.

The focus belongs on the 2nd Amendment, and it being amended, to be reflective of how the public has been affected over and over again by the offenders, criminals, and the first time citizens who used their legally purchased guns to kill innocent people.

It would be commendable if all of the victims of gun violance received as much constructive dialogue, in the 2nd Amendment being amended to show those commendations, instead of the focus being primarily on the criminals, and on the notions by some that firearms do nothing? 

Why can't the Second Amendment, be reflective of an all peaceful public, along with side amendments about preventative laws, that address offender, criminal, and first time offender crimes that affect the public as a whole? 

As in, a life in prison for murder/s punishments, or the death penalty as a punishment? 

This way, there is an across the board understanding, for the public as a whole, instead of the weapons owners only? 

And then when the offenders, criminals, and the first time offender crimes, go about infringing on the rights of innocent people by committing gun violence against those innocent people, the offenders know ahead of time, what their gun violence crimes, will earn them, by hurting, or killing innocent people, and taking their rights away from them, via unlawful gun violence.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Nope, there is no problem with the 2nd Amendment and guns aren't a problem.

Yes, there is, it's being abused by the offenders, criminals, and the previous law abiding citizens who used their legal weapons to kill innocent people with them.

"Guns don't do anything."

Yes, they do, do things, they have been used by law enforcement, to protect and serve the public.

And they have been, used for years by offenders, criminals, and various first time offenders, who have committed murder/ suicides involving the youth, and other whole families, by using their weapons, to commit their various crimes with.

And the various offenders, who have used their weapons to kill some of the youth, and some of the teachers at schools, and at night clubs and concerts.

"Guns don't tell stories,"

Yes they do, that is what forensics is for.

"they cannot talk. If there is a problem, it is a crime problem."

Yes, they do, forensics.

"Keep the focus where it belongs, on the criminals."

The above, is a pro gun narrative.

The focus belongs on the 2nd Amendment, and it being amended, to be reflective of how the public has been affected over and over again by the offenders, criminals, and the first time citizens who used their legally purchased guns to kill innocent people.

It would be commendable if all of the victims of gun violance received as much constructive dialogue, in the 2nd Amendment being amended to show those commendations, instead of the focus being primarily on the criminals, and on the notions by some that firearms do nothing? 

Why can't the Second Amendment, be reflective of an all peaceful public, along with side amendments about preventative laws, that address offender, criminal, and first time offender crimes that affect the public as a whole? 

As in, a life in prison for murder/s punishments, or the death penalty as a punishment? 

This way, there is an across the board understanding, for the public as a whole, instead of the weapons owners only? 

And then when the offenders, criminals, and the first time offender crimes, go about infringing on the rights of innocent people by committing gun violence against those innocent people, the offenders know ahead of time, what their gun violence crimes, will earn them, by hurting, or killing innocent people, and taking their rights away from them, via unlawful gun violence.

I say "Keep the focus where it belongs, on the criminals."

You say "The above, is a pro gun narrative." then go about listing all of the additional punishments you'd meet out to violent criminals.  Does that make you a pro gun extremist?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Keep the focus where it belongs, on the criminals."

(The above, is a pro gun narrative.) 

It's your pro gun narrative.

And you're not in a sense, using the Second Amendment, to platform your various pro gun narratives with? 

I'm pro community, pro family, pro the rights of innocent people to have a life, not diminished by an offender, criminal, or first time offenders gun violence crimes, infringing on the rights of those innocent people via those offender's gun violence. 

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Do you have any additional comments for the rest of the points of view? 

Nope, there is no problem with the 2nd Amendment and guns aren't a problem.

Yes, there is, it's being abused by the offenders, criminals, and the previous law abiding citizens who used their legal weapons to kill innocent people with them.

"Guns don't do anything."

Yes, they do, do things, they have been used by law enforcement, to protect and serve the public.

And they have been, used for years by offenders, criminals, and various first time offenders, who have committed murder/ suicides involving the youth, and other whole families, by using their weapons, to commit their various crimes with.

And the various offenders, who have used their weapons to kill some of the youth, and some of the teachers at schools, and at night clubs and concerts.

"Guns don't tell stories,"

Yes they do, that is what forensics is for.

"they cannot talk. If there is a problem, it is a crime problem."

Yes, they do, forensics.

"Keep the focus where it belongs, on the criminals."

The above, is a pro gun narrative.

The focus belongs on the 2nd Amendment, and it being amended, to be reflective of how the public has been affected over and over again by the offenders, criminals, and the first time citizens who used their legally purchased guns to kill innocent people.

It would be commendable if all of the victims of gun violance received as much constructive dialogue, in the 2nd Amendment being amended to show those commendations, instead of the focus being primarily on the criminals, and on the notions by some that firearms do nothing? 

Why can't the Second Amendment, be reflective of an all peaceful public, along with side amendments about preventative laws, that address offender, criminal, and first time offender crimes that affect the public as a whole? 

As in, a life in prison for murder/s punishments, or the death penalty as a punishment? 

This way, there is an across the board understanding, for the public as a whole, instead of the weapons owners only? 

And then when the offenders, criminals, and the first time offender crimes, go about infringing on the rights of innocent people by committing gun violence against those innocent people, the offenders know ahead of time, what their gun violence crimes, will earn them, by hurting, or killing innocent people, and taking their rights away from them, via unlawful gun violence.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Do you have any additional comments for the rest of the points of view? 

Nope, there is no problem with the 2nd Amendment and guns aren't a problem.

Yes, there is, it's being abused by the offenders, criminals, and the previous law abiding citizens who used their legal weapons to kill innocent people with them.

No, that's not correct at all.  Murderers aren't using the 2nd Amendment, they aren't entitled to any rights at all.  THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW.  It's like blaming child porn on the 1st Amendment.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"No, that's not correct at all.  Murderers aren't using the 2nd Amendment, they aren't entitled to any rights at all.  THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW.  It's like blaming child porn on the 1st Amendment."

The second amendment belongs to everyone in the United States, who are law abiding citizens, (the citizens who lawfully own weapons, and the rest of the other citizens, who want peace for rest of their communitties that they are a part of.)

So why does it seem like in a sense, that some of the pro gun individuals, are borderline, bogarting the Second Amendment almost exclusively for themselves, and are surrounding that amendment with their individual pro gun narratives? 

Innocent people get killed, and some of the pro gun crowd, protest, any changes, even in the wakes of the innocent lives lost in those communities? 

A question, I would ask, who gave some of the pro gun crowd, the right to in a sense, dictate to the rest of the communities, how they  should maybe just live with the second amendment as it is, because some of the pro gun crowd says so, by those very protests? 

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"No, that's not correct at all.  Murderers aren't using the 2nd Amendment, they aren't entitled to any rights at all.  THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW.  It's like blaming child porn on the 1st Amendment."

The second amendment belongs to everyone in the United States, who are law abiding citizens, (the citizens who lawfully own weapons, and the rest of the other citizens, who want peace for rest of their communitties that they are a part of.)

So why does it seem like in a sense, that some of the pro gun individuals, are borderline, bogarting the Second Amendment almost exclusively for themselves, and are surrounding that amendment with their individual pro gun narratives? 

Innocent people get killed, and some of the pro gun crowd, protest, any changes, even in the wakes of the innocent lives lost in those communities? 

A question, I would ask, who gave some of the pro gun crowd, the right to in a sense, dictate to the rest of the communities, how they  should maybe just live with the second amendment as it is, because some of the pro gun crowd says so, by those very protests? 

It doesn't seem like some pro gun individuals are bogarting the 2nd Amendment.  It seem like most pro gun individuals want the 2nd Amendment to be observed.  It seems like all of the outspoken anti gun individuals want to dismiss the plain language of the 2nd Amendment and act as if it doesn't exist.  The 2nd Amendment says what it says and means what it means.  If you wish to change it, there is a specific procedure for going about doing just that;  Article V, U.S. Constitution

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

You are giving the entire website an education on your individual view of your Second Amendment observation, in it being "observed" via your below statement.

"It doesn't seem like some pro gun individuals are bogarting the 2nd Amendment.  It seem like most pro gun individuals want the 2nd Amendment to be observed.  It seems like all of the outspoken anti gun individuals want to dismiss the plain language of the 2nd Amendment and act as if it doesn't exist.  The 2nd Amendment says what it says and means what it means.  If you wish to change it, there is a specific procedure for going about doing just that;  Article V, U.S. Constitution"

So here's an observation based on your individual statement:

So in a matter of speaking, on in a sense, wouldn't that maybe mean that the thousands of innocent people who have been killed by gun violance, their deaths, reside at the feet of the second amendment, because of the abuse of the second amendment, by the offenders, criminals, and first time offender's, killing innocent people with their gun violence then? 

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

This talking point from you, is your most enlightening:

"The only thing that will satisfy @TTKDB, Hogg, etc. is an infallible way to stop murders from ever happening.  If a single murder happens, they can climb back up on their soapbox and complain about how we need to do something for the poor victim.  It's ridiculously unrealistic to even contemplate.  I've been trying to steer him into it, but I haven't been able to get him to move from the "but, but, but, the poor victims" reply to anything constructive."

"But, but, but, the poor victims."

Is the above, maybe how you the various victims of gun violence? 

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

It doesn't seem like some pro gun individuals are bogarting the 2nd Amendment.  It seem like most pro gun individuals want the 2nd Amendment to be observed.  It seems like all of the outspoken anti gun individuals want to dismiss the plain language of the 2nd Amendment and act as if it doesn't exist.  The 2nd Amendment says what it says and means what it means.  If you wish to change it, there is a specific procedure for going about doing just that;  Article V, U.S. Constitution


In contexts the 2nd Amendment is a written change made on the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Militia are a method of peaceably assembling which is directing the creation of a United State Military for a United State Constitutional defense, and preservation. Note the United States Constitution. The 2nd is debatably as an article of the First Amendment. Ratification does not insure a united state, that is as a legal precedent within the bounds of Constitutional principle.

TTKDB

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms and was adopted on December 15, 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights.[1][2][3][4] The Supreme Courtruled in the 2008 Heller decision that the right belongs to individuals in their homes for self-defense[5][6][7] while also ruling that the right is not unlimited and does not preclude the existence of certain long-standing prohibitions such as those forbidding "the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill" or restrictions on "the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."[8][9] Stateand local governments are limited to the same extent as the federal government from infringing this right.[10]



The definition of the word "preclude."

pre·clude

/prəˈklo͞od/

verb

1. prevent from happening; make impossible.

   "the secret nature of his work precluded official recognition"        

   synonyms:

   prevent, make it impossible for, make it impracticable for, rule out, put a stop to, stop, prohibit, debar, interdict, block, bar, hinder, impede, inhibit, exclude, disqualify, forbid; estop "his difficulties preclude him from leading a normal life"

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

This talking point from you, is your most enlightening:

"The only thing that will satisfy @TTKDB, Hogg, etc. is an infallible way to stop murders from ever happening.  If a single murder happens, they can climb back up on their soapbox and complain about how we need to do something for the poor victim.  It's ridiculously unrealistic to even contemplate.  I've been trying to steer him into it, but I haven't been able to get him to move from the "but, but, but, the poor victims" reply to anything constructive."

"But, but, but, the poor victims."

Is the above, maybe how you the various victims of gun violence? 

Nope, that's not how I view victims of gun violence.  That's the position you have put yourself in.  When you rely on Appeal to Emotion fallacies, as you do, how could that not be the case?

CYDdharta

John_C_87 said:

@CYDdharta ;

It doesn't seem like some pro gun individuals are bogarting the 2nd Amendment.  It seem like most pro gun individuals want the 2nd Amendment to be observed.  It seems like all of the outspoken anti gun individuals want to dismiss the plain language of the 2nd Amendment and act as if it doesn't exist.  The 2nd Amendment says what it says and means what it means.  If you wish to change it, there is a specific procedure for going about doing just that;  Article V, U.S. Constitution


In contexts the 2nd Amendment is a written change made on the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Militia are a method of peaceably assembling which is directing the creation of a United State Military for a United State Constitutional defense, and preservation. Note the United States Constitution. The 2nd is debatably as an article of the First Amendment. Ratification does not insure a united state, that is as a legal precedent within the bounds of Constitutional principle.

The militia isn't a method of peaceable assembly.  The purpose for calling up the militia isn't always peaceful, in fact these days, it's rarely so.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Nope, that's not how I view victims of gun violence.  That's the position you have put yourself in.  When you rely on Appeal to Emotion fallacies, as you do, how could that not be the case?"

"That's the position you have put yourself in."

CYDdharta, you created that point of view, from your own pro gun narrative mindset.

Because you've been trying to steer me, into this or that direction, remember? 

Here's the evidence to that very motive:

"The only thing that will satisfy @TTKDB, Hogg, etc. is an infallible way to stop murders from ever happening.  If a single murder happens, they can climb back up on their soapbox and complain about how we need to do something for the poor victim.  It's ridiculously unrealistic to even contemplate.  I've been trying to steer him into it, but I haven't been able to get him to move from the "but, but, but, the poor victims" reply to anything constructive."

So,  you're not using me as your apparent scapegoat, to go give your own pro gun narrative, it's own validity.

So when a parent went to their house, and killed their family, and then turned their gun on themselves, thus committing a murder/ suicide crime.

You're labelling that situation, as this:

"It's appealing to emotion fallacies?"

Where in the second amendment, does it state that you, get to dictate to the non gun owning public how they are supposed to view a first time offender who committed a crime, via murder/ suicide? 

Who gave you any license, to tell anyone have they should view gun violence, according to how you individually see things CYDdharta? 

Applesauce

@TTKDB
I'm extremely bored so I'll address some of the confusion you seem to be having.

Why does any convict who's on parole have a gun on his person, when his parole officer, told him after, getting out of jail, if you are caught with a gun, in your possession, your going back to jail? 

as I have previously posted they aren't afraid of the consequences, aka the punishment isn't a deterrent.

The 21 guns used by the Vegas shooter, they can tell a story can't they? 

he used 1 possibly 2, what good is the story anyway?  Knowing that helps fix the issue how?

I'm pro community, pro family, pro the rights of innocent people to have a life, not diminished by an offender, criminal, or first time offenders gun violence crimes, infringing on the rights of those innocent people via those offender's gun violence. 

that's awesome since I'm not a criminal then I'm innocent and you are pro my rights

A question, I would ask, who gave some of the pro gun crowd, the right to in a sense, dictate to the rest of the communities, how they  should maybe just live with the second amendment as it is, because some of the pro gun crowd says so, by those very protests? 

like any right you can choose not to use it and even move away from it, but why should your opinion be forced on me?  seems rather fascist.
do I have a right to protect myself and family from criminals?  Or are you going to dictate to me and those like me how or if we can protect ourselves and families.

So why does it seem like in a sense, that some of the pro gun individuals, are borderline, bogarting the Second Amendment almost exclusively for themselves, and are surrounding that amendment with their individual pro gun narratives? 

because you are lacking in understanding, it's not exclusively for themselves, but for their children and future generations, expand your mind instead of having such a narrow focus.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

So when a parent went to their house, and killed their family, and then turned their gun on themselves, thus committing a murder/ suicide crime.

You're labelling that situation, as this:

"It's appealing to emotion fallacies?"

Yes, of course.

Where in the second amendment, does it state that you, get to dictate to the non gun owning public how they are supposed to view a first time offender who committed a crime, via murder/ suicide? 

Who gave you any license, to tell anyone have they should view gun violence, according to how you individually see things CYDdharta?

The 2nd Amendment states what it states.  Nowhere in it will you find a reference to the poor victims.

TTKDB

@Applesauce

What's telling about your points of view? 

The thumbs up, they got from Zombieguy1987?

Do you know you, who deserves (multiple  thumbs up) in regards to the gun control conversation?

The various citizens, and the various first responders, who helped each other out, when gun violence has disturbed the peace of a peaceful seeking public?  

Like in Vegas, Florida, Texas, and so on?

Applesauce

@TTKDB

The citizens, and the first responders who helped each other out, when gun violence has disturbed the peace of a peaceful seeking public. 

The citizens, and the first responders who helped each other out, when violence has disturbed the peace of a peaceful seeking public. 

there ya go, I fixed it for you.

do you think Heather Heyer cares or cared how she was murdered?  Do you think her family and loved ones felt great relief when they heard she WASN'T murdered with a gun?

do you not have compassion for her family?  Why don't you want to address all murders?  Don't you care about the people and families murdered by something other than a gun?

Do you know who jeffrey dahmer was?  Why don't you want to try to find and stop people like him instead of taking guns from law abiding citizens or needlessly making it more difficult for them?

You see I'm against all murders and violence not just certain kinds.  Except the violence I commit against targets, because target lives don't matter.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@Applesauce

Whats fascinating about your points of view?

 

What I find fascinating about your points of view is that we've been going on and on about this for weeks and you still haven made clear just what it is you think should be done.

TTKDB

https://www.newsweek.com/americas-gun-violence-epidemic-mass-shootings-getting-deadlier-1146879

Some excerpts from the article:

"AMERICA’S GUN VIOLENCE EPIDEMIC: MASS SHOOTINGS GETTING DEADLIER

"It's been 12 months since 64-year-old Stephen Paddock opened fire on a crowd at the Las Vegas Route 91 Harvest festival, killing 58 people and injuring hundreds more, in the worst mass shooting on U.S. soil in modern history.

The massacre’s horrific violence shocked the nation, but it was part of a wider trend. According to data from Stanford University’s Mass Shootings in America project, deaths from mass shootings, defined as the firearm-enabled murder of four or more people at once, are on the rise.

Throughout the 1970s, mass shootings were a rare occurrence. They became more frequent in the 1980s and over the last decade have become deadlier, claiming far more lives.

Unless the death toll reaches double digits, shootings are common enough to pass without much media attention. In 2015, The Washington Post reported that there was a shooting for every day of the year.

As gun violence rises, so does support for gun control. Polling company Gallup found that people who felt that laws regarding the sale of firearms should be made stricter rose from 47 percent in 2014 to 67 percent in 2018."

"However, gun reform law changes face strong opposition. The National Rifle Association (NRA) increased the amount it spent on lobbying from $3.19m in 2016, to $5.12m in 2017—an increase of 60 percent.

We’ve listed the worst shootings in America since 1949, when a WWII veteran, Howard Unruh, shot his neighbors during what became known as the “Walk of Death.”

Unruh’s actions are generally regarded as the first modern American mass shooting, although it should be noted that hundreds of African-American and Native American people were murdered with guns en masse during the previous centuries.

The list reflects the increasing deadliness of mass shootings; the five most deadly took place from 2007 onwards. The most recent, the Santa Fe High School shooting, took place in May of this year, suggesting this wave of violence looks far from dying down."

Applesauce

@TTKDB

didn't read one, not one possible solution which is suppose to be the point of this thread right?  gun control?
you blather on with quotes and pointless questions with no solutions, what exactly is it you are trying to do or accomplish?

though what I find interesting is what he used "Luger P08, 8 round magazine"

TTKDB

Should America have gun control?

Do some of the GUN owners, think that maybe, they own the Second Amendment because they own guns?

Do some of the GUN owners, think that maybe, they own the country, because of the Second Amendment? 

Do some of the GUN owners, think that maybe, this debate, can be played with, because of how protective they are in using the Second Amendment as a platform for their individual pro gun narratives? 

Maybe, there should be gun control, if some of the humans who are part of the humanity, want to act inhumane, by committing various shootings, with their guns? 

Unless some of the lawful gun owners, maybe, want to volunteer their time, to providing security details, around various venues? 

Or maybe, just be protective over your own guns, and defend the second amendment, with your individual pro gun narratives, and just narrate with your pro gun narratives, around, more of the gun control conversations? 

When various individuals, walk around with their gun, flopping around in the right front pocket of their pants, who do these random weapons displayers, think that they are trying to intimidate, or impress, with their gun in their pockets like that? 

(One had their gun in a holster.)

Their guns looked like 9mm's? 

Someone on the streets? 

Maybe the above typy of casual gun display, has some sort of a gang affiliation attached to it? 

Or maybe is just showing off their leg iron, or their heater? 

What say you, some of the pro gun crowd, narrative providers? 

Applesauce

CYDdharta said:

TTKDB said:

@Applesauce

Whats fascinating about your points of view?

 

What I find fascinating about your points of view is that we've been going on and on about this for weeks and you still haven made clear just what it is you think should be done.

he has a point of view?  he's trying to be all clever, aloof and coy like a high school kid who wants to feel smart and a part of adult conversations, which he's failing miserably at.  Rather than engaging in real and meaningful dialog he tosses out links and quotes from them without ever saying anything of any substance.  There really are not arguments to be made on the subject anymore, nothing new or fact based.  It's the constant appeal to emotion, over and over again.  The same lemmings who chant things about the police, like frying them like bacon, are the same ones that want only the police to have guns.  They can not see the forest for the trees.  Let's work to reduce murder and violence.  The common demonstrator in both are.......the individual who commits them.
If your car leaks gas because there's a hole in the tank, imo, the best solutions are not to fill it up more often, don't fill it up past the hole, it would be to get it fixed or replaced.  They would stick their finder in the dike to stop the leak.  (for you nubs look up the reference if you don't understand the meaning)

Evidence

Alec said:

Guns provide protection against the potential of there being a tyrannical government.  If you think a tyrannical government won't ever form in the US, then how do you think about Donald Trump?

We already have a tyrannical government, does NASA.gov sound familiar to you?
How about "You Have Cancer", or "Pink", .. or "Children's Cancer network.org". I have not seen, or heard of even ONE bullet fired at them. No guns to stop this tyranny!
Theft, murder, deception, the works, who identify us the public as enemy number one.
"We the People" never meant us.

Evidence

YeshuaBought said:

I say yes because too many people are dying. My factual right to live outwerighs your alleged right to shoot me. If you are a gun nut, you are NOT prolife!

Should America have gun control?

I find this ironic since the question is directed at the most heavily armed country in the world!

TTKDB

@Evidence

"Should America have gun control?

I find this ironic since the question is directed at the most heavily armed country in the world!"

Can you show one news article, where an offender or a criminal used a NAVY ship, to commit a crime or a mass shooting with?

Please, where is your evidence, to support your individual commentary? 

TTKDB

@Applesauce

Who is the below being directed at? 

"he has a point of view?  he's trying to be all clever, aloof and coy like a high school kid who wants to feel smart and a part of adult conversations, which he's failing miserably at.  Rather than engaging in real and meaningful dialog he tosses out links and quotes from them without ever saying anything of any substance.  There really are not arguments to be made on the subject anymore, nothing new or fact based.  It's the constant appeal to emotion, over and over again.  The same lemmings who chant things about the police, like frying them like bacon, are the same ones that want only the police to have guns.  They can not see the forest for the trees.  Let's work to reduce murder and violence.  The common demonstrator in both are.......the individual who commits them.
If your car leaks gas because there's a hole in the tank, imo, the best solutions are not to fill it up more often, don't fill it up past the hole, it would be to get it fixed or replaced.  They would stick their finder in the dike to stop the leak.  (for you nubs look up the reference if you don't understand the meaning)"

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

Should America have gun control?

Do some of the GUN owners, think that maybe, they own the Second Amendment because they own guns?

Do some of the GUN owners, think that maybe, they own the country, because of the Second Amendment? 

Do some of the GUN owners, think that maybe, this debate, can be played with, because of how protective they are in using the Second Amendment as a platform for their individual pro gun narratives? 

Maybe, there should be gun control, if some of the humans who are part of the humanity, want to act inhumane, by committing various shootings, with their guns? 

Unless some of the lawful gun owners, maybe, want to volunteer their time, to providing security details, around various venues? 

Or maybe, just be protective over your own guns, and defend the second amendment, with your individual pro gun narratives, and just narrate with your pro gun narratives, around, more of the gun control conversations? 

When various individuals, walk around with their gun, flopping around in the right front pocket of their pants, who do these random weapons displayers, think that they are trying to intimidate, or impress, with their gun in their pockets like that? 

(One had their gun in a holster.)

Their guns looked like 9mm's? 

Someone on the streets? 

Maybe the above typy of casual gun display, has some sort of a gang affiliation attached to it? 

Or maybe is just showing off their leg iron, or their heater? 

What say you, some of the pro gun crowd, narrative providers? 

Why is it any of your business what other people have in their possession?