Infringement

Into the Night said:
1) Wikipedia is summarily discarded. You cannot use that as a reference with me.
2) You linked to an unrelated fallacy that has nothing to do with an inversion fallacy.
False authority fallacy. Redirection fallacy.

You are using it to mean infringement on gun rights by gun control laws, and moving the goalposts to mean property rights are gun control laws. That's a fallacy, dude.
Click to expand...

Try this one dumfuck. It says the same thing. Now, find my “if/then” statement

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/77/Denying-the-Antecedent

You don’t have a fucking clue what an inversion fallacy is.
 
countryboy said:
Wait, you think one can simply order a gun online and have it shipped directly to their doorstep? Surely, even you are not that stupid.
Click to expand...

This misconception has been explained numerous times and JPP liberals still seem to want to promote it.

Then when asked for proof of their assertion, then end up suddenly have "other things to do".

:facepalm:
 
domer76 said:
Tell us about your sawed off shotgun. That does not limit your right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

Serbu_SS_left.jpg


1.-LEAD-opt-Pedersoli-Howdah-Double.jpg


Or just use this:

tau-4510tkr-3ss_lg_3.jpg
 
th


I prefer one of these (.45 LC/.45 ACP convertible). One hangs loaded on my bedpost in a custom made holster.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
This misconception has been explained numerous times and JPP liberals still seem to want to promote it.

Then when asked for proof of their assertion, then end up suddenly have "other things to do".

:facepalm:
Click to expand...

He knows it's a lie. Liberalism is built on lies, there's no other way to sell what they're peddling.
 
Flash said:
There is nothing in the Constitution suggesting these rights are inalienable. The freedoms included in the Bill of Rights were those freedoms as they existed at the time. Courts have since expanded those rights to give us more freedom from government restrictions than in the early republic.
Click to expand...

The Constitution does not grant rights. Neither does any court.

The court has recognized, though, that the Bill of Rights is NOT an exhaustive list of rights. They have little choice, since they are not authorized to change the Constitution.
 
StoneByStone said:
Hopefully none. The point of gun control is to limit gun rights.
Click to expand...

...never mind the Constitution of the United States, or republics at all for that matter. You want an oligarchy. That's a dictatorship by committee. You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy.

Do you really think you will become part of the 'elite' in that oligarchy?
 
Into the Night said:
...never mind the Constitution of the United States, or republics at all for that matter. You want an oligarchy. That's a dictatorship by committee. You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy.

Do you really think you will become part of the 'elite' in that oligarchy?
Click to expand...

I want the laws to change through the process we have now.
 
StoneByStone said:
I want the laws to change through the process we have now.
Click to expand...

The only way to install the laws you want is to amend the Constitution of the United States to remove the 2nd amendment, remove the 4th amendment, remove the 5th amendment, remove the 9th amendment, and remove the 10th amendment, and to specifically redefine what powers the federal government is given to regulate guns and by what criteria, and the powers delegated to each branch to implement such laws. This essentially gives the government power to create oligarchies overseeing guns, with no further input from the people.

or

Destroy the Constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy directly.

That is the process. There is no other.
 
Into the Night said:
The only way to install the laws you want is to amend the Constitution of the United States to remove the 2nd amendment, remove the 4th amendment, remove the 5th amendment, remove the 9th amendment, and remove the 10th amendment, and to specifically redefine what powers the federal government is given to regulate guns and by what criteria, and the powers delegated to each branch to implement such laws. This essentially gives the government power to create oligarchies overseeing guns, with no further input from the people.

or

Destroy the Constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy directly.

That is the process. There is no other.
Click to expand...

Or we can just do what we do now. Ignore muh constitution like we always have.
 
Into the Night said:
So you choose the 2nd option. Destroy the constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think we should destroy muh constitution, it's a cute little propaganda tool. And we already have an oligarchy. I think we should decentralize power more so the public gets more of a say.
 
Into the Night said:
The Constitution does not grant rights. Neither does any court.

The court has recognized, though, that the Bill of Rights is NOT an exhaustive list of rights. They have little choice, since they are not authorized to change the Constitution.
Click to expand...

The Constitution determines which rights are not to be restricted by government. Sure, the 9th Amendment says there are other rights not listed in 1-8 that are reserved to the people. The right to privacy is one of those rights the courts have created.
 
Into the Night said:
...never mind the Constitution of the United States, or republics at all for that matter. You want an oligarchy. That's a dictatorship by committee. You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy.

Do you really think you will become part of the 'elite' in that oligarchy?
Click to expand...

"You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy."

What a laughable crock of horseshit. :rofl2:
 
Into the Night said:
The only way to install the laws you want is to amend the Constitution of the United States to remove the 2nd amendment, remove the 4th amendment, remove the 5th amendment, remove the 9th amendment, and remove the 10th amendment, and to specifically redefine what powers the federal government is given to regulate guns and by what criteria, and the powers delegated to each branch to implement such laws. This essentially gives the government power to create oligarchies overseeing guns, with no further input from the people.

or

Destroy the Constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy directly.

That is the process. There is no other.
Click to expand...

Wrong, dumbfuck. Read Heller again. Educate yourself.
 
domer76 said:
One can defend themselves. Your stupid assumption that you have a right to a gun to do so is absurd. Most of the rest of the workd says you are full of shit.

Yeah, punk. Governments grant and remove rights. It’s the height of ignorance that you think differently. There is no right to bear arms in the rest of the world because their governments have not recognized nor granted that right.
Click to expand...
[1] People have the right to defend themselves.
[2] Governments can remove people's right to defend themselves.

Which is it?
 
gfm7175 said:
[1] People have the right to defend themselves.
[2] Governments can remove people's right to defend themselves.

Which is it?
Click to expand...

Neither, dumbfuck. Where is the universal right to defend yourself? Look at extreme Muslim cultures. Females have no rights, including the right to self defense.

Yep, people can defend themselves. Big fucking deal. There is no universal right to do so. Only the physical ability to do so.

Governments can choose to not grant the right to defend yourself with a gun. That's the point, moron.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top