Congress Pushes Anti-gun Brady Law Expansion Bill

[7960]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Kidnapping, death threats and invoking a riot are all things that effect others. My owning a firearm is none of anyone's business.

<libertarian view>

kidnapping is depriving someone of their freedom so of course that's illegal, but enticing a little girl toward your van does her no harm unless you actually kidnap her and enticing should be covered by freedom of speech so enticing should not be illegal.

killing someone is depriving them of their life so of course that's illegal, but death threats should be covered by freedom of speech and don't do harm so should not be illegal.

rioting should only be illegal if someone actually get hurt or some property gets damaged, and invoking a riot is should be covered by freedom of speech so invoking a riot should not be illegal.

</libertarian view>

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Threatening my life is not a violation ?

Where did I say threaten? I said I would describe how I would do it.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Kidnapping, death threats and invoking a riot are all things that effect others. My owning a firearm is none of anyone's business.

Nothing I mentioned is kidnapping, a death threat and a riot is started by my use of a constitutional right? Sounds like it needs to be infringed.

If my right to speach can be infringed for public safety, then why can't yours? (this is tounge in cheek btw)

You're right. Your owning a gun does not infringe on my rights. But would you be willing to be held responsible for any crimes committed with the gun registered to you if it were stolen?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You're right. Your owning a gun does not infringe on my rights. But would you be willing to be held responsible for any crimes committed with the gun registered to you if it were stolen?

Should you be held responsible for any crimes committed with your car if it's stolen?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by 7960

Should you be held responsible for any crimes committed with your car if it's stolen?

Does my car have any purpose other than to end life?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Does my car have any purpose other than to end life?

The only purpose of a gun is to end a life?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by 7960

The only purpose of a gun is to end a life?

You don't think so? Please tell me what it's other purposes are.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You don't think so? Please tell me what it's other purposes are.

To prevent someone from attacking.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by 7960

To prevent someone from attacking.

True. It can also be used to threaten to end life.


Anything else?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

True. It can also be used to threaten to end life.

So can a car.



I'm surprised you can't see how stupid your argument is. If someone breaks the law they should be held liable for it. If I break into your garage and steal your car and run someone over I should be held responsible. If someone breaks into my house and steals my gun and shoots someone NO part of that is my fault.

[JSmythe]

Originally Posted by 7960

<libertarian view>

kidnapping is depriving someone of their freedom so of course that's illegal, but enticing a little girl toward your van does her no harm unless you actually kidnap her and enticing should be covered by freedom of speech so enticing should not be illegal.

killing someone is depriving them of their life so of course that's illegal, but death threats should be covered by freedom of speech and don't do harm so should not be illegal.

rioting should only be illegal if someone actually get hurt or some property gets damaged, and invoking a riot is should be covered by freedom of speech so invoking a riot should not be illegal.

</libertarian view>

the threat of force is in itself force, its called assault, if you didn't know.

and fraud is also illegal and that would cover the enticement of the little girl

trying to get people to riot should be covered by freedom of speech, yes

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Where did I say threaten? I said I would describe how I would do it.

And what else would you call that ?

Sorry but if I get a note in the mail describing the way someone would kill me, that is a threat.

[Diamond Cross]

If guns cause crime do matches cause fire? Should matches be outlawed then since matches cause people to be kille by being burned alive? Smoking causes cancer, so should cigarettes be banned since the only function of a cigarette is to poison and kill people? Obesity causes heart disease and other heatlth problems that leads to death. should obesity be outlawed since the only function of obesity is to kill people?

More people die by car accidents than by firearms each year. That means a car is far more dangerous than a firearm and is inherently life-threatening.

A firearm has a multi-purpose function. Yes it can be used to kill, but it is a tool that helps saves lives as well. Many people would lose their lives if they didn't have a firearm to defend themselves against an attacker. It also provides food on the table for some families.

And i still stand by my statement, a firearm is only a tool. It is not designed to take lives, it is designed to defend lives.

Our country would not exist if it weren't for firearms protecting it. Oh sure, a lot of pretty words would get said, but pretty words are just an annoying gnat to be smashed under a flyswatter. They don't mean anything without something more tangible to back them up.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by 7960

So can a car.



I'm surprised you can't see how stupid your argument is. If someone breaks the law they should be held liable for it. If I break into your garage and steal your car and run someone over I should be held responsible. If someone breaks into my house and steals my gun and shoots someone NO part of that is my fault.

So lets see. A gun has 2 uses. Kill and threaten to kill.

How many uses does a car have?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

If guns cause crime do matches cause fire? Should matches be outlawed then since matches cause people to be kille by being burned alive? Smoking causes cancer, so should cigarettes be banned since the only function of a cigarette is to poison and kill people? Obesity causes heart disease and other heatlth problems that leads to death. should obesity be outlawed since the only function of obesity is to kill people?

All the more reason why I should be able to own a nuke. Since the nuke isn't the problem, it would only be a crime problem if I used it.

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

A firearm has a multi-purpose function. Yes it can be used to kill, but it is a tool that helps saves lives as well. Many people would lose their lives if they didn't have a firearm to defend themselves against an attacker. It also provides food on the table for some families.

So it's used to kill, threaten to kill and kill animals. I'm amazed by it's versitility.

I wonder how many people in the US still rely on hunting their own food?

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

Our country would not exist if it weren't for firearms protecting it. Oh sure, a lot of pretty words would get said, but pretty words are just an annoying gnat to be smashed under a flyswatter. They don't mean anything without something more tangible to back them up.

Absolutley. We use firearms to protect the country. Those people are called the military. But your guns do nothing. They do not defend this country. King George is not going to come over here and take your land. The government here is not going to spin out of control and take your land. Even if they did, you really think your few guns are going to stop them?

[Diamond Cross]

So do you believe the only people should be allowed to to own firearms are the military and law-enforcement agencies?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

So do you believe the only people should be allowed to to own firearms are the military and law-enforcement agencies?

Me? No.

[Diamond Cross]

What do you beleive about firearms then?

For me, the second ammendment is absolute and should not be infringed. Any form of control is an infringement, even requiring people to own a firearm is an infringement. It is a right. Not a privalege.

[phreak]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

True. It can also be used to threaten to end life.


Anything else?

target shooting

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

So lets see. A gun has 2 uses. Kill and threaten to kill.

sport as well