Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[hunarcy]

Reality says differently. Now what?

we rein in activist judges and get back to the ideal.

They are only "activist" when you didn't get your way.

Examples that prove your statement about me is correct?

 

[kaz]

So they tried something and it didn't work, at least they're trying. The gun loons want more guns everywhere, which also isn't working. It's like cancer, it might take a really long time to figure out a cure for every situation, and they won't stop trying until they get it done. Bravo!

Why try what has proven not to work?

Like the guy that throws cold water on a grease fire.. Not smart, but hey, 'at least they did something'.. lol

-Geaux

If the gun loons would get out of the way, I'm sure the laws could be changed to try to find a cure for this cancer. Fingerprint scan on the gun would be a start, little kids would never find armed guns again, even if loaded. But too many gun loons, the cancer appears terminal.

Guns scare you because you envision rogue gun wavers who could shoot you. So you take guns away from honest citizens, so it's only the rogue gun wavers who have any guns. And you're safe now.

Gotcha

 

[Spoonman]

Is that like abortion? And we limit your rights here, all of them, so sorry.

is abortion a constitutional right? I didn't think so.

btw, why aren't you out bitching about the millions of abortion deaths a year hypocrite? want to save some lives, start with some big numbers

Who said I want to save lives? And we are talking about your inability to understand that rights have limitations.

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

 

[kaz]

If the gun loons would get out of the way, I'm sure the laws could be changed to try to find a cure for this cancer. Fingerprint scan on the gun would be a start, little kids would never find armed guns again, even if loaded. But too many gun loons, the cancer appears terminal.

With ideas like that no wonder your movement is a failure

-Geaux

Thanks for the pointless gun loon comeback.

Right, rational people just want criminals armed. We loons believe we should have the right to be armed as well. Very persuasive, you are.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

is abortion a constitutional right? I didn't think so.

btw, why aren't you out bitching about the millions of abortion deaths a year hypocrite? want to save some lives, start with some big numbers

Who said I want to save lives? And we are talking about your inability to understand that rights have limitations.

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

 

[kaz]

is abortion a constitutional right? I didn't think so.

btw, why aren't you out bitching about the millions of abortion deaths a year hypocrite? want to save some lives, start with some big numbers

Who said I want to save lives? And we are talking about your inability to understand that rights have limitations.

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

Government doesn't infringe on our rights, only Christians do. And conservatives, but conservatives are all socons. And libertarians are all Republicans, who are neocons, which is the same as socon, so it's all the same. The actual meaning of the second amendment is that the Church can't infringe on government's right to have guns or restrict government from preventing honest citizens from having guns. Get it now?

 

[hunarcy]

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

The only limitation on a right is when exercising the right directly affects the rights of others, not if it "might" affect someone someday.

 

[kaz]

Who said I want to save lives? And we are talking about your inability to understand that rights have limitations.

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

 

[Bumberclyde]

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

So Spoon, you're not upset that you can't buy nukes or cruise missiles?

 

[Spoonman]

Who said I want to save lives? And we are talking about your inability to understand that rights have limitations.

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

subversives acknowledge limitations. governments trying to take control away from the people and give it to themselves acknowledge limitations. limitations take the power from the people where it was intended to be and hand it over to government which is what the founding fathers fought a war to take away. every limit place on our rights weakens us as a nation. liberals love big government and love limits. big government sells out to the highest bidder. has us almost 18 trillion i debt, has 47% of the population on entitlements, has people working for slave wages.

 

[kaz]

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

So Spoon, you're not upset that you can't buy nukes or cruise missiles?

The government does not have the right to infringe on your right to bear arms, it is not required to sell you arms. So I don't know how you're going to get those things. And if you do, how you're not going to infringe on other people's rights since nukes have lots of radiation issues. However, if you can and you can do it in a way that doesn't infringe on other's rights, why should you be restricted from those?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

no rights don't have limitations. limitations that have been put on them are unconstitutional. when a right says, shall not be infringed. it means no limitations. it does not say the right to bear arms with the limitations set forth by congress.

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

In my world, often called reality, we do recognize them,and we also recognize, like nearly all things, that they have limits.

 

[Bumberclyde]

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

So Spoon, you're not upset that you can't buy nukes or cruise missiles?

The government does not have the right to infringe on your right to bear arms, it is not required to sell you arms. So I don't know how you're going to get those things. And if you do, how you're not going to infringe on other people's rights since nukes have lots of radiation issues. However, if you can and you can do it in a way that doesn't infringe on other's rights, why should you be restricted from those?

Stray bullets don't seem to have any problems infringing on other people's rights. And you can buy missiles and all kinds of crap on the open and black markets worldwide, except see what the government does when you try to bring it or ship it home. Better still, advertise some anti-aircraft missiles on eBay with a US address and see what happens.

 

[kaz]

So Spoon, you're not upset that you can't buy nukes or cruise missiles?

The government does not have the right to infringe on your right to bear arms, it is not required to sell you arms. So I don't know how you're going to get those things. And if you do, how you're not going to infringe on other people's rights since nukes have lots of radiation issues. However, if you can and you can do it in a way that doesn't infringe on other's rights, why should you be restricted from those?

Stray bullets don't seem to have any problems infringing on other people's rights.

If you want to go with snarkey that is fine, but it needs to at some level make sense.

And you can buy missiles and all kinds of crap on the open and black markets worldwide, except see what the government does when you try to bring it or ship it home. Better still, advertise some anti-aircraft missiles on eBay with a US address and see what happens.

Talk about not making sense, so when we object to government infringing on our second amendment rights, you give us the example as some sort of rebuttal that government is infringing on our second amendment rights? Can you clarify the point you think you are making here?

 

[kaz]

Well I'd just love to respond to that but reality won't allow me to. In the real world we acknowledge the limitations on rights.

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

In my world, often called reality, we do recognize them,and we also recognize, like nearly all things, that they have limits.

In liberal reality, socialism makes capitalism more capitalist, if you pay poor workers more they will work harder, if you send trillions of dollars to poor countries you will solve global warming, when Democrats do the exact same things as Republicans Democrats are good and Republicans are evil, and criminals won't buy illegal guns. Liberal reality has nothing to do with factual reality, you really need to be able to tell those apart.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

In your world, you don't recognize rights at all.

In my world, often called reality, we do recognize them,and we also recognize, like nearly all things, that they have limits.

In liberal reality, socialism makes capitalism more capitalist, if you pay poor workers more they will work harder, if you send trillions of dollars to poor countries you will solve global warming, when Democrats do the exact same things as Republicans Democrats are good and Republicans are evil, and criminals won't buy illegal guns. Liberal reality has nothing to do with factual reality, you really need to be able to tell those apart.

Based upon your post, you and reality haven't been on friendly terms for quite some time now.

 

[kaz]

In my world, often called reality, we do recognize them,and we also recognize, like nearly all things, that they have limits.

In liberal reality, socialism makes capitalism more capitalist, if you pay poor workers more they will work harder, if you send trillions of dollars to poor countries you will solve global warming, when Democrats do the exact same things as Republicans Democrats are good and Republicans are evil, and criminals won't buy illegal guns. Liberal reality has nothing to do with factual reality, you really need to be able to tell those apart.

Based upon your post, you and reality haven't been on friendly terms for quite some time now.

You really don't think about what you're saying or what other liberals say, do you?

 

[buckeye45_73]

I still think gun free zones are the way to go. I mean all these mass shootings happening at places where guns are banned, I mean how can that not convince you that gun control works and criminals would never break the law.

 

[Bumberclyde]

I still think gun free zones are the way to go. I mean all these mass shootings happening at places where guns are banned, I mean how can that not convince you that gun control works and criminals would never break the law.

WoW! 10,000+ posts and you're still a noob. I guess we should stop looking for the cure to cancer as well, I mean, since we haven't cured it yet we should stop trying?

 

[kaz]

I still think gun free zones are the way to go. I mean all these mass shootings happening at places where guns are banned, I mean how can that not convince you that gun control works and criminals would never break the law.

WoW! 10,000+ posts and you're still a noob. I guess we should stop looking for the cure to cancer as well, I mean, since we haven't cured it yet we should stop trying?

If our approach to curing cancer is to re-try solutions that we already know don't work, then yeah, we should quit trying...