How To Argue For Gun Control.

No. You explain why Americans should be denied semiautomatic weapons.

Do you have even a remote clue of why Madison memorialized our natural right to keep and bear arms?

 

Desire to change Occidental culture of America/

Who debunked Lott? You?

You just write BS hoping that some of it will will stick.

 

Balbus,

Gun control has racist foundation.

How would you propose to divest criminals of tools of their trades? Do you think criminals would surrender their guns?

How's gun control working in Australia?

Let's find out: http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2013/03/new-australian-study-shows-more-guns.html

 

[SIZE=11pt]Luguna[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Let me get this clear - your reply to the question - what do you think are the reasons behind such crime statistics[/SIZE] – is

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Do you think this is a conspiracy by non westerners to what…make America Oriental? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Can you reply to the second part - how would you tackle this problem?[/SIZE]

 

MeAgain,

I do sense a desire to learn. I admire people who are lifelong learners. If you're like me, you want to operate from a position of fact as opposed to a position of fallacy.

James Madison authored our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, our Constitution would not have been ratified. Anti-Federalists and Federalists alike would have rejected our Constitution.

Without private ownership of guns, we would not have prevailed in our first civil war (we were all English prior to Cornwallis's defeat).

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

Source: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm

Madison wrote the Second Amendment and explained his reasoning in The Federalist No. 46. When you think of the Second Amendment, think preservation of liberty. The Second Amendment isn't about hunting, recreational shooting, gun collecting, shooting bad guys in the night, or Olympic competition. Madison memorialized our natural RIGHT to keep and bear arms to prevent tyranny from seizing control of our republic. This is not opinion. It is historical fact. There is a reason why Democrats and neocons want us disarmed and it has zero to do with crime. It has everything to do with vanquishing our constitutional republic. I would not do well in the New World Order. I am not a sissified globalist. I am an American, and I'm damned proud of it. President Trump will make me more proud to be American. He knows the importance of the Second Amendment.

Never forget that without Madison's Second Amendment, our Constitution would not have been ratified.

We are unlike other countries of the world. The USA is unique. It was intended to be unique. I don't give a shit what France, GB, and the rest of the world does. I care about America and only America. I am not a globalist stiff. I'm a patriotic American. I don't buy in to an ISIS threat (ISIS threat is a ruse to dupe us in to surrendering our guns). But should it be real and they want to wreak havoc in America, bring it. We'll see how many minutes ISIS survives in America. We'll repackage them and ship them back from whence they came, our being no worse for wear. I'd pay to see a terrorist try to pull shit in Utah. In Utah, everyone carries guns. A terrorist wouldn't get past his initial stage of terror before Utahans made him Swiss cheese.

If you want to remove the Second Amendment from our Bill of RIGHTS, you darn well ought to know why it is a RIGHT before hastily proceeding.

If a leftist totalitarian dictator (all totalitarian depots have arisen from the left for they were antithetical to the right which cherishes maximum individual freedom) tries to shove me into a railroad car with destination extermination, I will fight. The only way to fight is with a gun. I might die, but I'll die fighting back. I am not the kind to walk meekly into a gas chamber. If I'm gonna die, bad guys are going with me.

MeAgain, the Second Amendment represents liberty. Be careful of diluting it. You might regret it.

 

If open access to antibiotics is the problem, why does antibiotic resistant bacteria mainly occur in western countries where there is no such access?
And usually around farms and hospitals in those 'no access' countries.

Your government lies to you, in order to control you.

 

This is a bullshit question. There is no single cause of crime.

The only proved way of reducing crime is to identify criminals and arrest them the second they commit crimes.

How would you reduce crime? I think that you have zero clue of how American administration of justice works.

Why don't you do a ride-a-long with Chicago PD? You might go home alive.

Do you think that Chicago's criminals will surrender their guns?

Criminals want gun control. They know that only law abiding Americans will surrender their guns, which will leave them neutered for criminals.

 

Yes i know and all scientist are really lizards and the illumanti really rule the world -)

 

Or you could stop defining those who use drugs for pleasure as criminals. That is probably the biggest single cause of crime.
Just stop locking up people who harm nobody but themselves.

If I want to smoke weed, or meth, snort coke or inject H, who am I harming?

PS
I quite like guns, never really wanted a semi auto rifle though.
Shotguns and handguns. I had loads, but the police in the UK bought them all off me when they banned private ownership of guns a few years back.
Never really though of them as 'self defense', apart from my wife and the police, nobody has ever threatened me.\
And shooting either of them would have probably been a bad move.

 

Laguna

Over your little rant -OK - to repeat again - what do you think are the reasons behind such crime statistics and how would you tackle them?

 

I have a science degree, which technically makes me a scientist, what's your degree?
(are you claiming Trump and Clinton aren't lizards?)
I also diagnose for all my own illness, and my family, and am better at it than the local doctors.
They wanted to cut out my gall bladder, a while back, I still have it and it's working just fine.
They wanted to cut out my kids appendix and there was nothing wrong with it, he still has it.
My friend had stomach cancer, doctors say try this and that, spent all his money gave his a few weeks false hope, internet said dead in 2-4 months, and he was dead in 9 weeks.
They can usually do broken bones and stitching up cuts, I do use them for that, but that's only practice. Diagnosis they ain't so hot.
I'd go to them for gunshot wounds too.

Most doctors aren't all that skilled, and make plenty of serious mistakes, but they're really good at billing.

 

Hart-Cellar was subterfuge. It's goal was to dilute America's Occidental culture.

 

Extremism is desperation. It implicates lack of ability to argue intellectually. Perhaps this is a topic for which you're ill-suit to participate.

 

You're not getting it. Crime is not singular in its cause. Myriad factors cause crime.

Perhaps knowledge of causality of crime might prevent your from posting pseudo-intellectual gobbledygook.

 

With this I agree...in part. Drug addicts should not be imprisoned for only drug abuse. However, most drug addicts steal, which is a crime for which they should be arrested and imprisoned. Drug addicts cannot hold jobs. Hence, their only source of drug money is to steal it from others who have earned it.

 

A degree makes you degreed and nothing more. Performance makes you. So far, your performance is deficient.

My education is irrelevant. My argument is. Refute it.

 

Balbus,

You might want to consider stopping while you're behind. As politely as I can convey this, you're becoming unhinged.

 

White men with no education always say that. It doesn't make it true.
I used to mix with entertainment and media people, we all took loads of drugs, none of us needed to steal to buy them.
Quite often 'corporate hospitality' would buy them for us. Was I a drug addict, no I could take it or leave it.

"hey man, big party, we got loads of coke" .... no thanks.
"hey man, big party, we got beer and hookers" ..... count me in.

Poor people merely have less options to fund their lifestyles, I don't begrudge them a bit of stealing.
I do object to the rich people stealing, bankers, investment managers, etc. They do have choices.

People who have stolen from me ... my investment manager, former wife, divorce lawyer (inflated billing), hospital (inflated billing), government (taxes) .... no poor black drug addicts with guns (so far).
Why are you so scared of poor black drug addicts? Have they ever harmed you? Did your gun protect you from them in a shootout?

 

What exactly is an education? Was Benjamin Franklin educated? He never graduated from university. How about Abe Lincoln? He was self-taught. Were they educated? How about Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and Michael Dell? Neither graduated from university? Were they educated?

 

No, they weren't.
Ability to make money or be famous does not equate to education.