CIVIL discussion on Current Issues. If you can't stay CIVIL, then please just stay out of this thread.

Winco

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2019
19,825
15,074
This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
No name calling or threats.
Just say I respectfully disagree.
If you can't do that, then just stick with the other threads.

I'll start. BackAgain

2nd Amendment:

A heated discussion topic.


What do you want to discuss? Self defense is a civil and human right, currently under attack by the left.
 
Humans can't exist without killing something thus the need for weapons.
 
1656343008861.png


1. Whatever law enforcement or a security agency can carry in their armory should be available for me to purchase as an individual.

2. No taxes on my RIGHT to bear arms!!! If the government wants me to obtain a permit and training then its done on their dime. This is nothing more than a poll tax on my rights and if they can tax this they can tax our right to vote.

*****SMILE*****



:)
 
This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
No name calling or threats.
Just say I respectfully disagree.
If you can't do that, then just stick with the other threads.

I'll start. BackAgain

2nd Amendment:

A heated discussion topic.

Why did you leave out lying? You can't have a civil discussion as long as you lie either.
 
This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
No name calling or threats.
Just say I respectfully disagree.
If you can't do that, then just stick with the other threads.

I'll start. BackAgain

2nd Amendment:

A heated discussion topic.

Detailed teaching to people what self-defense is. When defending oneself the correct way to be taught or educated. What is a threat? It is easy to say something is not when it seems people are surrounding you or an individual is making a move towards you or your property that you are in. The couple on their porch with weapons a couple of years ago with people on the street and pavement is an example.
 
Humans can't exist without killing something thus the need for weapons.

It is a problem going back to day one on the planet.

Before there were guns there were swords before swords there were pikes before that there were knives before that rocks and clubs before that hands.

It is the people who are doing the killing not the weapons which are inanimate objects.
 
This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
No name calling or threats.
Just say I respectfully disagree.
If you can't do that, then just stick with the other threads.

I'll start. BackAgain

2nd Amendment:

A heated discussion topic.

Civil discussion?
Have you gone mad?
 
I don't own any guns and cannot have a discussion on any particular components of such guns.

I support the 2A 100%, but it was written over 240 years ago.
Things have obviously changed since muzzleloaders.

We license fishing, cars, trucks, boats, trailers, businesses, etc
Cars and trucks weren't even invented yet, so there is obviously nothing in the Constitution about cars and trucks.

I believe that the criminals will always be criminals and will never abide by new or old laws.

So making background checks so they contain ZERO loopholes would not be an infringement.
How is getting a background check infringing. You're a Law Abiding Citizen.

That said, how would we ever patrol private guns sales.
We can't, so quit trying.

Pandora's box is wide open, so nothing will ever really change, I just wish we could stop arguing about it.

Law Abiding Citizens aren't the problem.

That's a small start.
Feel free to discuss this and other current issues.
But be CIVIL.
 
This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
Well, good luck with this one.

Anyway, when it comes to the gun issue, on a macro level, the cat is out of the bag. The horse is out of the barn. The toothpaste is out of the tube. There are nearly 400 million guns out there, and while many are owned by careful, responsible gun owners, many are owned by people who have them to commit crimes. So, the saying "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" is perfectly reasonable and legitimate.

So in a normal world, we would accept that and then look at areas of compromise like normal adults. Unfortunately, it appears we no longer have that capacity. As a predictable result, we can no longer address problems and are in decline.

I can understand the gun owners' fear about a "slippery slope" on gun laws, and they'll have to be convinced (above and beyond the voices in their world telling them not to listen) that the slippery slope is not in the cards. How is that done? I have no idea.

Seems to me that, like a marriage that is in deep trouble, we need to first learn how to communicate and listen before we can fix any of the larger problems facing us. Not holding my breath on that.
 
This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
No name calling or threats.
Just say I respectfully disagree.
If you can't do that, then just stick with the other threads.

I'll start. BackAgain

2nd Amendment:

A heated discussion topic.



They already have a place for this, it's called the Clean Debate Zone....but good luck ...
 
What does this ^^^^^ mean?
Lying? Who's lying?

I mean, are you miketx already calling me a liar in THIS thread?


I think Mikey is talking about your hypocrisy, because YOU are the one always coercing and pissing off people into rants and telling you off.......and finds it highly amusing that YOU, of all people, are asking for civility!!!
 

Forum List

Back
Top