Defensive Carry banner

21 - 36 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,980 Posts
That's not a unique argument, that's just stupidity. Proof a college education does not make one smart nor intelligent. I've know more than my share of "educated" people who are dumber than a box of rocks.
No matter the continual "reasoning" of our forefathers, clearly they intended for the common citizen to be allowed to own and carry arms, whether the traditional knife, sword, or flintlock sidearm of their day, or the current state-of-the-art "arms" of today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
A far left guy I know is very anti gun, of course. When I reminded him that cars kill 3x or more people every year than guns do, his reply:

"But guns are made to kill. Cars are not."

Therefore, it is OK that cars kill and no one should have guns. .... Is your brain rattled enough now?

NOTE PLEASE: GUNS DO NOT KILL! We know that but I was trying to talk to him in his language. You really cannot reason with those people. They do speak a totally different language!
Agreed. Just like any inanimate object, it is the “operator” who determines the outcomes. I owe guns, but have not kill anything with them. Likewise, with my car as well. His argument is BS. Given my own life experiences, I am more like to kill someone in a car accident, than with my firearms, but then again, if I was residing in a bad part of town that, it might just the opposite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
A far left guy I know is very anti gun, of course. When I reminded him that cars kill 3x or more people every year than guns do, his reply:

"But guns are made to kill. Cars are not."

Therefore, it is OK that cars kill and no one should have guns. .... Is your brain rattled enough now?

NOTE PLEASE: GUNS DO NOT KILL! We know that but I was trying to talk to him in his language. You really cannot reason with those people. They do speak a totally different language!
I can’t stand the whole “guns are made to kill” argument. A gun fires a projectile. Nothing more, nothing less. A car goes forward, backwards, and turns left and right. Where the operator chooses to go is up to them. Someone buying a gun with the intent of using it to kill is no different than renting a box truck with the intention of putting a bomb in the back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,252 Posts
So I thought I had heard them all, but this is a new one for me. I thought I would post it because I think we all need to be well versed on the arguments we are up against.

Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz has a Ph.D. in history from UCLA, she taught in the newly established Native American Studies Program at California State University, Hayward, and helped found the Departments of Ethnic Studies and Women’s Studies. So you can assume she is a raving alt-liberal.

Ironically, her argument parallels Heller in that she agrees that the RTKABA is an individual right was not intended aid in the forming of militias. But it is where she goes after that which is troublesome. She claims that the sole purpose for 2A was to ensure that whites could continue to kill Native Americans and push them out of their lands AND have the ability to do "slave patrols." For that reason, she reasons 2A should be eliminated.

I won't even begin to discuss all that I think is wrong with this argument, because I don't think it deserves that much time and it would go on too long. But I hadn't seen this particular argument before and I thought people should be aware of it.

https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/here-are-the-lies-liberals-tell-themselves-about-the-second-amendment/
This is one of the wildest and most absurd things I’ve ever heard of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
700 Posts
As a mixed race mutt American, married to a Native American and having a bunch of half breed kids running around she can go :censored: ...we aren't giving up our guns.


na_gun_control.jpg


I like how she cleverly is ignoring the fact that the NRA was formed to protect the rights of the freed slaves to bear arms too. She is a disgrace to her people and a shame to her Pueblo husband.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,095 Posts
Some valid points, but reversed. It was the VIOLATION of the 2A by Democrats that gave way to prohibiting Native Americans and blacks from owning guns so that the Democrats could violate treaties and terrorize blacks.

The Second Amendment dos NOT give us the right to bear arms. Instead, it FORBIDS the government from violating that natural right to defend ourselves against foreign and domestic threats. That includes invading armies and violent criminals and rogue politicians.

Likewise, the First Amendment doesn't GRANT the right to freedom of religion, press and speech. Instead, it PROHIBITS government from prohibiting or hindering those inalienable and presumed rights.

The Bill of Rights is NOT a bill of rights, but restrictions on the government, restrictions that are NOT being upheld.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
When those on the Ctrl Left run out of logic (which doesn't take long, generally speaking) they resort to name calling and labeling. The whole "Its all racist" argument isn't particularly new, but to the intersectional identarian types, it's the standard issue weapon. Because every white American is supposed to feel guilty for the actions of their ancestors (or even non related people with a similar skin tone) that may have in any conceivable manner harmed (and that term is often stretched to the breaking point) what have now become "protected classes" of people. Unfortunately, it works as much as not with the typical American, who lacks the moral backbone to stand up to the bullies pushing this nonsense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

I guess she doewsn't consider Native Americans, or other minorities to be "people".
I would love to tell her that gun control has racist roots since it originally was meant to prevent black people from owning guns, but I’ll probably never have the opportunity to tell her that. People like her wear class A hazmat suits to shield themselves from the truth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msgt/ret and Vexmaw

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,663 Posts
Free blacks in the north were permitted to bear arms.
Indian disarmament came from Jacksonian policy or law, not the 2A. Jackson (Dem) ordered terrible, unconstitutional things happen to.the native Americans.

If the 2A gave white people guns to oppress blacks and native Americans, why do Democrats want to take away guns from everyone? Unless your goal is oppressing everyone.

Why did so many people (abolitionists) fight for freed slaves to own property and firearms? The exception was southern Democrats.

Today, there is one group who wants to eliminate private property and firearms ownership. If those were key to oppression in the past; guess what?
 
21 - 36 of 36 Posts
Top