Frustrate an anti-gunner. Compare fatal DUI punishment....

This is a discussion on Frustrate an anti-gunner. Compare fatal DUI punishment.... within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; They keep telling us to regulate guns and gun owners like cars and drivers. Well, there's a down side for anti-gunners in this scenario (and ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 34
Like Tree22Likes

Thread: Frustrate an anti-gunner. Compare fatal DUI punishment....

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Array DaveWorkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    589

    Frustrate an anti-gunner. Compare fatal DUI punishment....

    They keep telling us to regulate guns and gun owners like cars and drivers.

    Well, there's a down side for anti-gunners in this scenario (and if you don't believe me, try this with some gun grabber and watch the blood pressure rise

    Treat gun violators like DUI and punish the perpetrator

    Treat gun violators like DUI and punish the perpetrator - Seattle gun rights | Examiner.com
    WHEC724 likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,822
    Why don't we just stick with the meaning of the 2A. I can not understand why we try to convince anti's by using analogies and example that have nothing to do with the Second A. I understand the philosophy of doing what you want but it only changes the subject to something else.

    The issue is the 2A. It should not be compared to any other issue that is not 2A related. All of these arguments have been used before and they fall on deaf ears.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array GlassWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,747
    The difference being that a driver's license is a privilege granted by the state, whereas the right to keep and bear arms is a basic human right framed by the Constitution.

    Most anti-gunners are liberals. Just tell them that you've killed thousands fewer people with a gun, than they have with abortions. That always gets 'em riled up, and I'm even pro-choice.
    NONAME762 likes this.
    I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Patti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Show Me State
    Posts
    2,641
    Excellent article, Dave. You did a fantastic job. Keep up the good work and thanks for contributing to the defense of our 2nd Amendment rights. You are a true American.

    Your article reminded me of something my mother said many years ago:

    "There's nothing more uncommon than common sense."

    That is so true amongst the liberal anti-gunners. They have absolutely NO common sense.
    Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. — Winston Churchill

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array elmacgyver0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    678
    Quote Originally Posted by GlassWolf View Post
    The difference being that a driver's license is a privilege granted by the state, whereas the right to keep and bear arms is a basic human right framed by the Constitution.

    Most anti-gunners are liberals. Just tell them that you've killed thousands fewer people with a gun, than they have with abortions. That always gets 'em riled up, and I'm even pro-choice.
    Agree, this as it should be, but we don't follow it do we? If we legally carry we all have to grovel at the feet of the local sheriff or magistrate for the privilege of carring a weapon.
    Somehow we have lost sight that carrying weapons is a right. It has improved be we aren't there yet.
    GlassWolf likes this.

  7. #6
    Ex Member Array Manderinobyebye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,029
    Maybe it's just me,but,i've never said anything to a gun grabber,and they turn around and say,you know what,i agree with you.Every gun grabber,i've read about,or talked to,is a gun grabber.I don't waste my time,anymore,with antis.
    darbo likes this.

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,157
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Why don't we just stick with the meaning of the 2A. I can not understand why we try to convince anti's by using analogies and example that have nothing to do with the Second A. I understand the philosophy of doing what you want but it only changes the subject to something else.

    The issue is the 2A. It should not be compared to any other issue that is not 2A related. All of these arguments have been used before and they fall on deaf ears.
    Disagree. The issue is the 2A, yes. But the method is putting it in terms that even an anti-gunner can understand, one that hits home in an area where they aren't so blinded by irrelevancies and biases.
    Last edited by ccw9mm; May 16th, 2013 at 09:24 AM. Reason: grammar
    WHEC724, Brad426, phreddy and 2 others like this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,822
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    Disagree. The issue is the 2A, yes. But the method is putting in terms that even an anti-gunner can understand, one that hits home in an area where they aren't so blinded by irrelevancies and biases.
    But we do that all the time.....and they come back with:

    Cars are different. They are not meant to kill.
    People do not buy cars to go murder a bunch of people at a time
    Alchohol used in moderation does not hurt anyone
    Of course folks that drink and drive should be punished

    I am not justifying or agreeing with any of the above......

    I know many anti's and just for fun,,,,,because I know it won;t change thier minds, I ask them how they would like it if they brought back prohibition. They ignore it.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array SCXDm9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Why don't we just stick with the meaning of the 2A. I can not understand why we try to convince anti's by using analogies and example that have nothing to do with the Second A. I understand the philosophy of doing what you want but it only changes the subject to something else.

    The issue is the 2A. It should not be compared to any other issue that is not 2A related. All of these arguments have been used before and they fall on deaf ears.

    Because the 2nd amendment is just that, an amendment! I was not in the original constitution and it does not have to in the future constitution! Anything that helps someone see things the way we do it helpful to our cause!!!!
    Warrior1256 likes this.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,822
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Has it been working?
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array Warrior1256's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Louisville Ky.
    Posts
    669
    Quote Originally Posted by SCXDm9 View Post
    Because the 2nd amendment is just that, an amendment! I was not in the original constitution and it does not have to in the future constitution! Anything that helps someone see things the way we do it helpful to our cause!!!!
    Never considered it from this point of view before, but you're right. Thanks for calling my attention to this.

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array SCXDm9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Has it been working?

    slightly better your prohibition argument....

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array Hoganbeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    1,421
    Without going back to my notes and research, I believe the reason it wasn't in the original is because most of them felt it wasn't necessary to spell it out; everyone understood and agreed on it.
    Sarge65 likes this.

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,822
    Quote Originally Posted by SCXDm9 View Post
    slightly better your prohibition argument....
    What prohibition arguement? This one, the one where I made it a point I was not being serious and was doing it just for fun?
    I know many anti's and just for fun,,,,,because I know it won;t change thier minds, I ask them how they would like it if they brought back prohibition. They ignore it.
    You mean that one?

    I have had better luck talking to anti's by sticking to the subject of the 2A. Not crime, not comparing it to other things such as driving, but sticking to the 2A only. If they start comparing and stating crime stats I just interrupt them and ask where is crime addressed in the 2A. Stick to the topic.

    I ask them" tell me what guns should be banned and why"

    When they bring up assualt weapons I tell them what the difference is between a military M4/M16, an Ar-15, and a semi auto hunting rifle. I explain to them the cosmetic features.

    When they say that these guns were not invented back then I reply that in fact, if you go by the wording and intent of the Constitution, the diaries and writings of the FOunding Fathers, assualt weapons would be the last ones to be banned since that is the common arm of the infantry.

    When they try to talk about 5 year olds killing 2 year olds with b-day presents i ask them what does that have to do with the 2A? I do not bring up how many kids die every year in pools because mommys is not paying attention while she gets a tan.

    Then i will finally ask them if they want a change to the COnstitution or not.

    That is the only issue. And I actually do get farther in arguments and discusiions that way because you get rid of all of the biased stats and visceral analogies. But her is why it does not work....most folks do not approach it that way. We try to use our stats vs their stats. This terrible crime (Newtown) vs whan a CC'er actaully uses his weapon. It is all fluff.

    But we are all in the same fight. So you fight your way, and I will fight my way. I just prefer to use an arguement that actually addrresses what the issue is instead of clouding it with something that has noting to do with the 2A.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  16. #15
    Distinguished Member Array SCXDm9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoganbeg View Post
    Without going back to my notes and research, I believe the reason it wasn't in the original is because most of them felt it wasn't necessary to spell it out; everyone understood and agreed on it.
    I do not know the details about why it wasn't originally included and will take your word for it but result is the same. The constitution is an evolving document and I think it's useful for us to remember that when blowing our 2nd A horns. I believe (me, myself and I) if 2 or 300 people are killed in the next couple years from mass shootings we will see how evolving it really is.... JUST MY OPINION!
    Warrior1256 likes this.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

gunner for punishment?

,

treat gun violators like dui and punish the perpetrator

Click on a term to search for related topics.