GUNS - Page 14
+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4101112131415161718 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 204
Like Tree88Likes

Thread: GUNS

  1. #131
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    no but it promises that we are not subjected to unreasonable searches
    Exactly. What makes them feel like I'm going to blow up the plane or what not? I've never committed a crime. I've never even had a speeding ticket. I should be of no concern to them.

    But, I understand that they need to do what they need to do so I don't complain about it nor feel the need to amend the Constitution over it.
    Mom to Elizabeth (6) and Corinne (4)

  2. #132
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    No I still don't think that correlates. Even if the number of households with guns had decreased slightly, it hasn't decreased at even close to the rate that gun violence had decreased. So I still believe that we are safer by more people having guns.
    okay well i can't teach statistics, nor correlation vs. causation in a bulletin board forum. You have to take entire semesters of classes to understand them, which i did...but you are also ignoring my point about the graphic.

    Ultimately, the point is you have provided no substantial evidence that there is any causation involved here and you have actually provided a good piece of evidence that one does indeed NOT cause the other
    Potter75 and blather like this.

  3. #133
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    This combined with the graphic you provided...can we put this "the more armed people the safer the country" thing to bed maybe?
    No I still don't think that correlates. Even if the number of households with guns had decreased slightly, it hasn't decreased at even close to the rate that gun violence had decreased. So I still believe that we are safer by more people having guns.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  4. #134
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    no but it promises that we are not subjected to unreasonable searches
    You don't have to fly. You have a choice whether to submit to a search or not they aren't picking you at random on the street.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  5. #135
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    You don't have to fly. You have a choice whether to submit to a search or not they aren't picking you at random on the street.
    You don't have to own a gun either I don't feel that my constitutional rights are being infringed any ~ not by my limitations to not own a nuke, nor would they be my my limitations to not own a semi automatic rifle.
    Jessica80 and blather like this.

  6. #136
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    No I still don't think that correlates. Even if the number of households with guns had decreased slightly, it hasn't decreased at even close to the rate that gun violence had decreased. So I still believe that we are safer by more people having guns.

    See this is frustrating to me. You Insist on believing there is actual evidence that validates your claim when nothing you have provided does so. Thats a fact. To claim that more guns creates a safer nation based on the graphs and stats you have provided is simply not statistically or scientifically true. Saying "I don't believe you" to me doesn't change the fact that you are wrong.

    I dont 'think you should express frustration in the misinformation that the gun control side believes in when you are guilty of the same thing.

    Its one thing to say "I just have this gut feeling we are all safer, it makes sense to me and this is why". But to throw out statistics and graphics that most obviously DON"T support your claim and act like they do is another. Maybe you can fool a certain portion of the bulletin board communities with such stuff but you certainly cant' fool everyone.
    Potter75 and SID081108 like this.

  7. #137
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    You don't have to fly. You have a choice whether to submit to a search or not they aren't picking you at random on the street.
    so wait....then whats the issue with universal background checks then. You don't HAVE to exercise your right to own one.

    This sounds like a fair weather argument to me. When it works for you, you use it.

    And I mean that opens up the door for all SORTS of violations of our amendments.

    So in reality, they could start searching and seizing under all sorts of conditions, as long as its not just randomly grabbing you off the street.

    The point really is that most amendments have exceptions that are not explicity written out in them. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the reading of your miranda rights...even now, as we sit here debating, there are exceptions to the second amendment that are not directly written into it.

    I am responding to Bonita's suggestion that we'd have to rewrite the constitution or put in new amendments to put stronger gun control in place. Again, that's just false. Unless you can prove to me there are no exceptions to the amendments as they exist right now. The list of exceptions i can provide would be rather extensive, it certainly doesn't end at the searching of your bags in the airport.
    blather likes this.

  8. #138
    Online Community Director MissyJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Rocky Mountain Wanna-be
    Posts
    13,134

    Default

    I recognize that the debate has moved on but I am going to address some issues that have cropped up.

    It is fine to disagree with a point made. If you find it irrelevant based upon your beliefs -- whether about guns, abortion, religion, politics, or the sky being blue -- so be it. Either counter, ignore, or simply state that is not what you believe... WITHOUT the personal attacks, bashes, demeaning/derogatory digs, etc.

    It is NEVER OK to launch the personal attacks -- calling others stupid, ignorant, cowardly, idiots, etc. I KNOW EVERYONE here is able to debate respectfully. That does not require you to agree or accept someone's opinion or belief as "fact." It DOES expect that you can disagree while remaining civil to one another as well as other viewer's of this board. If you are unable to do so -- please take a break or leave.

    We are not going to create a separate board. If we did that for all of the various things that people find "offensive" we simply would have a million boards with zero traffic. Yes, I know there are those that are going to be "offended" by those professing to be "pro-life" referring to a pregnancy as a "baby" while those that are "pro-choice" will upset others by proclaiming a pregnancy as a "bunch of cells", "fetal tissue" or "a barely pink pee stick."

    Bonita's point -- based upon her belief (I'm guessing?) that life begins at conception... is related to the topic as she was responding to the point *she* found ironic -- In one instance there is a cause of concern to the level of doing "something" to change the laws impacting millions of gun owners to lower the # of 31,000 (or whatever the figure) of lives lost to gun deaths; whereas, -- again in my understanding of her opinion -- she finds there is not a similar concern to change the laws to protect the lives of 1.2 million babies (based upon those with the belief of life beginning at conception) due to the negative impact for those that have been raped or have medical issues. <--Yes, I recognize that Bonita was professing her assumptions summarizing why some choose to abort. I do not believe that she does not care about a loss of ANY human life at any age or stage.

    The response by Melissa -- with her counter sharing that with that (above) logic that we should not have laws governing traffic, illegal drugs, education... was a valid counter. It was also OK to protest what she felt was an assumption made for why women abort. Melissa - you, however made equal assumptions about those that argue to protect gun laws don't care about the loss of human life. Referring to people's belief as "sick and 'effed up" - is attacking. While BOTH sides of ANY of these controversial topics may feel that way about the "other side" -- keep it off the board as it does not contribute to the debate. That said -- it was *fair* to respond with your final question and the idea that you found that ironic.

    The response by Kim countering is also valid as she addressed the points without the personal digs. Kim, while I recognize that you may not have been the one to do so, others have brought up the topic of "gay marriage" within otherwise unrelated debates in making similar points as they (and forgive me as I really don't remember who to give credit to) found an argument or the "passion" presented by the other "side" of the debate topic somewhat ironic (for lack of a better term at the moment) in regards to an *opposing* pov on gay marriage. Others either countered with their own argument or ignored and moved forward.

    Again - I KNOW that these are all hot button topics. I appreciate hearing ALL of your thoughts and opinions and find that I either learn more of another's point of view and/or am challenged to learn more about my own stance -- which I would *hope* would be the purpose of this board. Thanks to all of you now moving on to debate your stance on gun control.

    ~Missy

  9. #139
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    I am responding to Bonita's suggestion that we'd have to rewrite the constitution or put in new amendments to put stronger gun control in place. Again, that's just false. Unless you can prove to me there are no exceptions to the amendments as they exist right now. The list of exceptions i can provide would be rather extensive, it certainly doesn't end at the searching of your bags in the airport.
    I said I was in support of reasonable restrictions like background checks. I believe you would need an amendment to make major changes like banning all handguns or requiring guns to be locked up at a hunting facility.

    ~Bonita~

  10. #140
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    so wait....then whats the issue with universal background checks then. You don't HAVE to exercise your right to own one.

    This sounds like a fair weather argument to me. When it works for you, you use it.
    No I don't think so. It says shall not be infringed. In my book that is infringement.
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions