1 - Eleven teens die each day because of texting while driving. Maybe it's time to raise the age of Smart Phone ownership to 21.
2 - If gun control laws actually worked, Chicago would be Mayberry, USA.
3 - The Second Amendment makes more women equal than the entire feminist movement.
4 - Legal gun owners have 300 million guns and probably a trillion
rounds of ammo. Seriously, folks, if we were the problem, you'd know it.
5 - When JFK was killed, nobody blamed the rifle.
6 - The NRA (National Rifle Association) murders 0 people and receives
($$$$ 0) nothing in government funds. Planned Parenthood kills 350,000
babies every year and receives $500,000,000 in tax dollars annually.
7 - I have no problem with vigorous background checks when it comes to
firearms. While we're at it, let's do the same when it comes to
immigration, Voter I.D., and candidates running for office.
8 - Folks keep talking about another Civil War. One side knows how to
shoot and probably has a trillion rounds. The other side has crying
closets and is confused about which bathroom to use. How do you think
that would work out?
9 A man who left 300,000 guns for the Taliban is lecturing us on gun control and lives in the White house.
15 comments:
It's that kind of illogic that brings us to the murderous society we have today.
Your answer to abortion murders is to stop abortions.
So it's just as logical to end gun 0killings is to ban all guns.
If Oswald could not buy his gun, JFK would never have been assassinated.
Look at countries that have strict gun laws (Great Britian, Japan, etc...) gun murders in those countries are practically n0n-exsistant.
How's this for logic...Democrat Hellhole Seattle Had Over 23% More Shooting Deaths in 2022
More one sided logic that leads us to a murderous society.
"The other side has crying closets"
Ha ha. The real "other side" is the Crips and the Bloods, groups that really know how to kill. About thirty seconds after these white Cosplayers run into them, they are all going to be running for home and crying for mama.
Jerry, with all due respect, do you truly think if all guns were banned that we would become a safer society with less gun violence?
Or perhaps would the criminals still keep their guns because they are criminals and now feel emboldened with their crimes because they know their targets are now all unarmed? Makes for a safer work environment for them, doesn't it?
When Australia inexplicably enacted their handgun ban, property crimes, rapes, and assaults all increased significantly. The UK, despite not having guns, is NOT a safe place in parts of the big cities there too. I do not understand how denying people the ability to defend themselves from criminals makes for a safer "less murderous" society? Can you please explain that, sir?
I would consider your point to be more rational if you could ensure that all the criminals were disarmed first; however, as we have seen, the cities with the strictest gun control laws inevitably have the worst gun violence, such as Chicago.
Green Eagle, first thanks for your comment. Second, I find it interesting that gang-bangers like the Crips and Bloods are "the other side" that the left would welcome that would be against typical red-state Americans. Ironically you help make my point. These thugs would be wiped out in a "civil war" against military veterans and outdoorsmen, despite their viciousness and disregard for life. I guarantee that the average gang-banger doesn't go to the gun range and practice. He doesn't actually know anything about guns other than to pull the trigger. I'd far rather take my chances standing in front of that gang-banger than in front of a Montana outdoorsman. But that is just me.
You are the one Darrell that promotes the "ban" theory as eliminating a behavior.
I guess I am confused. What is the purpose of banning guns?
It is a complete impossibility to get the criminals to give up their guns, so what is the point? Surely you don't want to simply disarm the law-abiding so they can no longer defend themselves, right?
Human nature is such that some will always embrace evil. Cain killed Abel with a rock long before firearms were invented.
In an ideal world, no guns or any weapons would ever be needed, I agree. Until Christ returns to reign that will never be the case because evil will always remain.
So what is the purpose of completely banning abortions?
Alcohol prohibition didn't stop millions of people from drinking. It just drove the alcohol industry underground where it was impossible to regulate, and enriched organized crime.
Our current bans on drugs and sex work don't prevent millions of people from accessing those things. They just drive those industries underground where they are impossible to regulate, and enrich drug cartels, pimps, and human traffickers.
It's bizarre to me that anyone believes the results of banning guns or abortion would be any different. People will get things they badly want, by whatever means are necessary. Already, abortion restrictions in red states have resulted in the development of work-arounds like abortion pills sent through the mail from blue states or even foreign countries. Any serious effort to ban or strongly restrict gun sales would quickly lead to similar work-arounds. It's impossible to enforce a law on a population that mostly views it as illegitimate. The majority of Americans support legal abortion in most cases, and already 60% of US counties are "sanctuary counties" where local authorities refuse to enforce state-level gun restrictions.
As for the existing 300 million guns in the hands of tens of millions of citizens, any real effort to confiscate them would require a gigantic totalitarian enforcement apparatus which almost nobody wants, and would still fail since many would resist violently and the government would run out of enforcers long before it put much of a dent in 300 million guns. Really enforcing a ban on abortion would require a similar de facto totalitarian system, and in practice many women would still manage to evade it.
It doesn't really matter what arguments people make for or against banning guns or abortion. In practice it's impossible.
The much lower crime rates in Europe and Japan also apply to crimes where guns are not relevant, and are probably mostly due to culture and the greater egalitarianism in those places compared to the US. Some countries with high rates of gun ownership, such as Sweden, still have low crime rates. Latin American and Subsaharan Africa have much higher rates of violent crime than the US does. Again, there's no reason to think availability of guns has much to do with that. It's probably more to do with culture and high levels of poverty and inequality.
Jerry, first there is not a complete ban on abortions. Overturning Roe v. Wade simply allowed each state to decide what restrictions, if any, they would place on abortion.
Hypothetically, if a nation-wide ban were to be enacted, Infidel is correct that abortions would still occur, albeit on a much smaller scale. The difference is that an abortion ban would save countless lives overall, while a ban on firearms would not as only the law abiding would give up their means of defense.
Infidel, I find myself largely in agreement with most of the things you wrote. Indeed your well-stated logic sounded very libertarian, sir. I appreciate your thoughtful comment!
You Darrell are the one who called for a complete ban of abortions in every State going beyond the elimination of federal Row/Wade saying we must end abortion murders. My point is that's a pipe dream, just as banning all guns is a pipe dream. When you talk of absolutes like that then your logic fails completely.
Jerry, you are correct that I have called for a federal law to end abortion, even though as Infidel pointed out, there will still be an underground abortion market that will exist for those still wanting an abortion. We will not ever be able to stamp out all abortions, but if one looks at the logical premise that abortion is the extermination of a nascent human life, I think we should strive towards the ideal of eliminating abortions.
Just as we have laws against murder, that doesn't mean we will ever eliminate them, but we should still strive for that goal.
I am not being logically inconsistent in calling for the elimination of abortion while still realizing this will never be fully realized.
The difference between that and gun bans, is that only the criminals would retain their weapons for nefarious use, while the good and just will have forfeited their ability and right to self defense from evil.
Hope that helps make some sense, sir.
Then by that same reasoning you should call for and support a ban on all guns. A life ending mechanism if there ever was one.
No Jerry. You missed the point entirely. Abortion always ends in the death of an innocent human.
Having a gun at hand when one is a target of serious assault, rape, or attempted murder is a means of an innocent person protecting themselves from evil. How is that wrong or a bad thing? Would you condemn an innocent person to the designs of whatever evil person has in mind simply because you despise the very means of self defense that the victim would otherwise have? Do you hate guns so much, that only the evil should have them? THAT is what a gun ban accomplishes. Nothing less.
At that same logic your abortion ban accomplishes nothing else either. Get your logic in sync.
Post a Comment