Who's really responsible aside from the bleeping shooter?

rjhenn said:
Legal gun owners are not the problem. Why should they have to pay for the behavior of criminals? If an auto manufacturer has a defect that kills owners, it's the defect that's responsible, and the manufacturer is liable. If a gun is used to kill someone, it's because of the person using the gun.With guns, it's defective people that are the problem, not defective guns. We could fix part of that by putting gun safety education into the public schools. The rest of it needs some serious research. But almost all of the research is obsessively focused on 'proving' that guns are the problem.
Click to expand...

The mass shooters are legal owners until they pull the trigger. Responsible ownership is a myth. Until the pull.they are just like you. Having weapons available like we do is asking for trouble and we are getting it.
 
Gonzomin said:
If you hand a weapon to a killer, you are an accessory. The NRA and gun sellers qualify. Gun owners should have to take out huge insurance policies that will help their victim's families get some redress. Gun manufacturers and sellers should also be liable for what they are putting into society. If an auto manufacturer has a defect in an auto that kills owners, they can and will be sued.
Click to expand...

If I lend you my car and you purposely kill someone with it, am I an accessory if I didn't know you were going to use it for that purpose?
And just how is the NRA an accessory? Would the auto maker be an accessory in the above scenario too?

Why is it that you liberals can't take responsibility for your own actions. If you twist your ankle stepping on a crack in a sidewalk, all of
a sudden you're off to a lawyer wanting to sue the property owner. It isn't the fact that you weren't paying attention to where you were
walking and you're just a damn whiny-assed idiot, now is it?
 
Gonzomin said:
The mass shooters are legal owners until they pull the trigger. Responsible ownership is a myth. Until the pull.they are just like you. Having weapons available like we do is asking for trouble and we are getting it.
Click to expand...

So what's your solution? Take my firearms because someone else might use theirs illegally?
Ain't happenin' Not in your lifetime or mine.
 
Gonzomin said:
The mass shooters are legal owners until they pull the trigger. Responsible ownership is a myth. Until the pull.they are just like you. Having weapons available like we do is asking for trouble and we are getting it.
Click to expand...
Mass shooters, like all mass murderers, are very sick individuals. Wouldn't it be better to try and figure out what makes them so sick, instead of forcing them to find other, possibly even more deadly means to express their sickness, a la Timothy McVeigh? There's never been a gun control law that has been demonstrated to have made things better. We've already got over 25,000 gun control laws in this country and none of them seem to have done anything except possibly made things worse.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
rjhenn said:
Now that's weird. Tapatalk says that #53 was by Jade, But in the browser, that's post 50. But neither of my posts says what you're reading into them. I'm not denying anything. Your TDS is totally out of control.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to put the weird post numbering situation aside, and will chalk that up to something weird with Tapatalk rather than you lying about that.

As to the content, you're still lying. It was your argument.
 
rjhenn said:
No, it's based on your willful misinterpretation of StoneByStone's words. Your home is a private place, not comparable to a country.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Your home is a private place. It is only for you and whoever else you decide to allow into it.

The USA is a private place. It is only for US citizens and whoever else we decide to allow into it (ie, naturalized immigrants).


Are you perfectly fine with me coming into your home illegally?? Yes or No.
 
gfm7175 said:
Your home is a private place. It is only for you and whoever else you decide to allow into it.

The USA is a private place. It is only for US citizens and whoever else we decide to allow into it (ie, naturalized immigrants).


Are you perfectly fine with me coming into your home illegally?? Yes or No.
Click to expand...
No, but again, a house is not the same as a country, your perverse logic to the contrary.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
rjhenn said:
No,
Click to expand...
Great. You don't want people coming into your home illegally. I knew you'd be adverse to that idea. Now, what about your close neighborhood? (ie, the same street you live on, the city or township you live in, etc...) Would you be okay with people coming into those places illegally?

rjhenn said:
but again, a house is not the same as a country, your perverse logic to the contrary.
Click to expand...
Never said they were the same in all aspects. I'm just saying that they are the same in the particular aspect being discussed, that they both are private residences. A home is for you only. It is private. A country is for its citizens only. It is private. A country, in that sense, is a macro version of your own home. Your home is a house. Your country is a whole shit ton of houses, including your own. If you don't want people illegally entering your house, then why would you want them illegally entering your country? Are you taking an "I'm fine with it as long as it's happening 'over there'" approach?
 
gfm7175 said:
Great. You don't want people coming into your home illegally. I knew you'd be adverse to that idea. Now, what about your close neighborhood? (ie, the same street you live on, the city or township you live in, etc...) Would you be okay with people coming into those places illegally?
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as "coming into those places illegally". I don't have to ask anyone's permission to walk through your neighborhood.


Never said they were the same in all aspects. I'm just saying that they are the same in the particular aspect being discussed, that they both are private residences. A home is for you only. It is private. A country is for its citizens only. It is private. A country, in that sense, is a macro version of your own home. Your home is a house. Your country is a whole shit ton of houses, including your own. If you don't want people illegally entering your house, then why would you want them illegally entering your country? Are you taking an "I'm fine with it as long as it's happening 'over there'" approach?
Click to expand...
You are just making stuff up out of thin air.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
rjhenn said:
There's no such thing as "coming into those places illegally".
Click to expand...
You have now completely done away with all trespassing and immigration laws, except with regard to your own house and property. Seems rather selfish to me...

Trespassing is illegal, whether that be trespassing into your house, onto your property, into someone else's house, onto someone else's property, or even into a city/state/country.

rjhenn said:
I don't have to ask anyone's permission to walk through your neighborhood.
Click to expand...
Correct, so long as you are staying on property that the city/township has designated as public property, abiding by any laws relating to such, and so long as you are a US citizen.

rjhenn said:
You are just making stuff up out of thin air.
Click to expand...
No, that's what you are doing. You are acting as if trespassing and immigration laws do not exist outside of yourself and your own property.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top