How To Argue For Gun Control.

There is no valid argument for gun control vis-a-vis the Second Amendment.

 

It shows the absurdity of your question. Your question is a matter of need, as if you get to decide what's needed by a citizen. It's not though, it's a matter of want, and when you start questioning a person's wants, you've lost the argument. I asked someone to explain why a person needs certain things in life I consider a want.

 

Nothing. It's about your question. I know it stings, but calm down.

 

MeAgain,

We know why Madison wrote the Second Amendment. Can you provide a valid and credible reason why we should undermine that right? Keep in mind that an opinion of a right that can be modified by opinion can be used to undermine other rights.

 

In California we voted to increase the gun laws.

Proposition 63 was passed! Background checks for ammunition and ban on large capacity magazines! That's what I call progress!

 

Laguna

I don’t think gun control advocates have asked for the removal of the second Amendment, we just want to limit the harm that comes from having such ease of access to guns, to try and lessen the possibility that they might get into the hands of the criminal and irresponsible.

Are you against that?

 

Oh, you do? This I want to hear.

Could it have been about some obscure but well regulated militia?

Back in 1791, I mean.

 

You cannot be for gun control and for the Second Amendment. They are mutually exclusive.

 

Really?

If you know why Madison wrote the Second Amendment, you'd know that gun control and the Second Amendment are mutually exclusive.

Here's what gunphobic liberals really want:

http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/no-one-wants-to-ban-or-confiscate-guns-huh-these-quotes-from-anti-gun-leaders-say-otherwise/

 

Lug

Sorry but do you have a rational argument?

 

No. Militias are comprised of armed citizens who form militias to fight to preserve our republic. Hence, gun ownership presupposes ANY militia.

[SIZE=12pt]“When the revolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was the governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people: that is was the best and most effectual way to enslave them: but they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually…I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of a future day. If that paper on the table [US Constitution] gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor…”[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]---George Mason---[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]"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.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]---Verbatim, The Federalist No. 46, James Madison, 29 Jan 1788---[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Source: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Militias do not control citizens. Citizens control militias. No militia is possible without armed citizens.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Madison wrote the second Amendment to give We, the People, a last resort to prevent tyranny.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]If you want ANY control of weapons, it must be done legally. The ONLY legal way to amend Madison's Second Amendment is described in Article V of the United States Constitution.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Be careful of what you wish for, you might just get it. Any spurious argument that has been used and spurious arguments that will be used to abridge our RIGHT to keep and bear arms can be used to abridge other rights including the Fourth Amendment. What's wrong with unannounced and warrantless searches of our homes? If you think that citizen gun ownership is bad, then it must be good to seize them. Therefore, I know that you wouldn't mind a warrantless search to prove that you're in compliance with gun control, right? I mean, you don't have anything to hide, do you? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Be very careful of what you wish for. You might just get it. [/SIZE]

 

gotta hand it to ya Balbus. Year after year you start these threads and they always end up as a lame back and forth between you and some ultra pro-gun yahoo.
You must be a bit of a masochist to continually put yourself through these endless, mindless debates.

and you are right, it is always the same old, same old.
you really should just cut and paste your old replies, save some wear and tear on the keyboard.

 

Dude seriously? I really wonder if you even think about what you're saying. Or maybe you're just some kind of robot. But in any case I will spell it out for you:

IN 2016 NO MILITIAS ARE NEEDED. TIME HAS PASSED. IT IS NOT 1791 ANYMORE. WAKE THE FUCK UP.

 

And you know that how?

If your premise is false, your conclusion will be false.

Unless you have a Ph.D. in clairvoyance from Miss Cleo's College of Fortune Telling, you have no clue of what the future holds.

Wake the fuck up. You are clueless of what is happening now.

But then again, clueless people are far easier to enslave all the while thinking that they're free.

 

This should have been your strategy before you became involved in an issue about which you know very little.

Tell me, how does gun control reduce crime?

 

Same to you. Sorry I couldn't help you.