US Supreme Court upholds individual right to gun ownership

[Ben Kenobi]

The level of training required to consistently use a gun in a non-lethal manner is above what almost everyone, including police officers, receives. Most people are trained to shoot for center mass; otherwise you're probably just going to miss.

I sure hope not. Firing to incapacitate isn't that difficult, and most officers will never have to use their guns at all.

It will depend on the calibre of the weapon, if you have a .22, it's not that hard to shoot in a non-lethal manner.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
That would be a correct analogy. You are putting out a false analogy, which does not hold up. You are correct in saying that you have a right to personal liberty which permits you to sleep with as many people as you wish, or to own firearms for self defence or hunting.

That is my argument here. Do you not see the parallels between the two?

You're dismissing it as a false analogy because it puts you in a position where you've got no way out.

1. I don't have a right to prevent anyone from associating with another person. Your statement is worded incorrectly.

You're right, you don't -- but you pretend you do anyway. You think gays can't get married, which is very much an association.

2. By that same basis, I have no right to regulate my neighbours desire to own a firearm.

You don't comprehend anything, do you. You're stopping two people from getting married, which is very much a personal liberty, and at the same time you're allowing people to own killing devices under the guise of it being a personal liberty.

This is an inconsistency. You're trying to argue that the right to marry the one you love is not a personal liberty, but it definitely is. You need to make your argument where you say it's not a liberty.

How so? How do guns threaten public safety and liberty? You'll have to lay out your case rather then stating a BAM.

Gee, Ben, let me think about this one for a bit.

Do you think I'd have a case that by me holding you hostage with a gun for days and then shooting you in your balls I am threatening your public safety and liberty?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


I sure hope not. Firing to incapacitate isn't that difficult, and most officers will never have to use their guns at all.

Uhhh, **** yeah it is. Damnit Ben, why don't you know anything?

Do you think it's trivial to shoot people in the leg (which move, by the way!) while having no chance to hit other areas like the groin?

[Ben Kenobi]

Because all it does is serve the ego of the "macho" man who kills a helpless being just because he can. I find it pathetic and the people who genuinely enjoy this kind of stuff are pretty sick.

Oh yeah, I'm totally into that macho stuff. I mean really.

Guns are bad because they are macho? If you've really hunted with a bow and an arrow, the animal is hardly helpless.

So is the opinion that you need guns for self-defence. The fact is, people can defend themselves without guns. That's not opinion, it's fact.

Excellent. So you agree then that people ought to be able to decide for themselves whether they should or should not own a gun, since as you said, it is a matter of personal opinion. Or would you prefer the word taste?

The line is drawn because firearms are explicitly intended to kill, baseball bats and tire irons are not. It's a pretty clear line, really.

Intended to kill what? Things? Plants? Animals? Psychedelic pink elephants with a hookah?

I notice you ignored my question.

Why are guns a threat to public safety and liberty? You threw out a BAM without any argument.

[Vesayen]

You don't need guns for self-defence, you don't need guns to hunt. If you're paranoid about self-defence, how about you do something healthy and learn a martial art.

The difference between a gun and a bat and tire iron is those other devices serve a purpose other than to kill. They are mis-used to kill rather than designed to kill. Additionally, tire irons and bats are far less lethal than guns.

I want the American public to have guns to be ready to fight tyrant if we have to.

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
This is nice of you. Care to explain to me how gun ownership fosters social cooperation and produces a prosperous society? This should be good.

Easy. Promoting a prosperous society and social cooperation is secondary to securing liberty. You also assume that owning a game is somehow "bad". Can you explain what is bad about owning a gun?

[Ben Kenobi]

You're dismissing it as a false analogy because it puts you in a position where you've got no way out.

How did I dismiss it? I gave two reasons why it was a false analogy, and why your argument fails.

Have you forgotten what I said already?

I won't carry on with this point until you address the points I already made.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


I sure hope not. Firing to incapacitate isn't that difficult, and most officers will never have to use their guns at all.

It will depend on the calibre of the weapon, if you have a .22, it's not that hard to shoot in a non-lethal manner.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong on this one. Talk to any police officer. They are not trained to incapacitate; they are trained to shoot center mass.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Oh yeah, I'm totally into that macho stuff. I mean really.

Guns are bad because they are macho? If you've really hunted with a bow and an arrow, the animal is hardly helpless.

I have never hunted. I made that very clear. You honestly have massive reading comprehension problems, along with other intellectual disabilities.

Guns are not bad because they are macho. Guns are banned because they are designed to kill. I just think, on a personal level, people who put themselves in a position where the animal can never win and then call it "hunting" are disgusting individuals. They're pathetic on many levels.

Some do it to feel macho, others -- like you -- would clearly do it to compensate and feel like you've got power over something. IIRC you're quite short in height and you've got a hearing disability, so it doesn't surprise me at all that you love the feeling of control you get when you kill other helpless animals to get your rocks off.

Excellent. So you agree then that people ought to be able to decide for themselves whether they should or should not own a gun, since as you said, it is a matter of personal opinion. Or would you prefer the word taste?

I absolutely do not agree. While it is a "personal opinion" whether they need guns, the fact are guns are a threat to public safety so your opinion doesn't mean **** to me. It's my personal opinion that you should be sterilized and deported to Australia, but that doesn't mean that should be legal for me to do.

Why are guns a threat to public safety and liberty? You threw out a BAM without any argument.

killing is a threat to public safety and liberty. Guns are designed to kill.

Do me a favour and hang out in downtown LA or Oakland for a week or so and then see if you can evaluate how the gun culture may impact public safety and liberty.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I happen to agree with you here that personally, I don't need one, but if other people want them, more power to em.

If you don't need a gun, why would someone else?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Vesayen
I want the American public to have guns to be ready to fight tyrant if we have to.

What century are you in, honestly. If you have a tyrant running your country, he's not going to be hanging out in rural Alabama walking his dog so you can come bust a cap in his ass.

Easy. Promoting a prosperous society and social cooperation is secondary to securing liberty. You also assume that owning a game is somehow "bad". Can you explain what is bad about owning a gun?

How do you secure liberty by having everyone around you becoming a deadly threat?

Liberty is a state of mind -- I don't know about you, but when I'm around people with guns I don't feel very "safe" or embracing liberty. Especially when you've got people like Ben, CivNation, Ned, and Agathon in this world. There are crazy people, guns are very dangerous.

Why do I think owning a gun is bad? Because it's owning a device intended to kill. Civilians shouldn't and don't need to kill.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


How did I dismiss it? I gave two reasons why it was a false analogy, and why your argument fails.

Have you forgotten what I said already?

I won't carry on with this point until you address the points I already made.

And I addressed your points and refuted them. Unfortunately, you are apparently not capable of reading and comprehending as you are pretending I did not. Now you are avoiding the issue because you've lost.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm sorry, but you're wrong on this one. Talk to any police officer. They are not trained to incapacitate; they are trained to shoot center mass.

For their own safety, in the case where they are dealing with someone who is armed.

In the case of someone who isn't armed, are you telling me that they could not shoot to incapacitate?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


For their own safety, in the case where they are dealing with someone who is armed.

In the case of someone who isn't armed, are you telling me that they could not shoot to incapacitate?

They could try, they're just not very good at doing so.

How is it that you can be so stupid so as to extol how hard it is to hunt, and suddenly it's so easy to hit small, moving parts on a target?



And why would you shoot an unarmed target?



Honestly, there's just a lack of thinking here.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
killing is a threat to public safety and liberty. Guns are designed to kill.

The likeliness of any American being killed by a gun is a far, far, far smaller threat to freedom then removing them for personal protection and the combined threat of being defenseless to a tyrant.

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles Do me a favour and hang out in downtown LA or Oakland for a week or so and then see if you can evaluate how the gun culture may impact public safety and liberty.

Those who commit crimes with guns will do so whether they are legal or not. Surley you are not worried about the legal use of guns, i.e., not murdering people, correct? You are only worried about murder. Passing laws to steal MY liberty and my protection from a tyrant, when criminals will still be criminals is pointless.

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles

What century are you in, honestly. If you have a tyrant running your country, he's not going to be hanging out in rural Alabama walking his dog so you can come bust a cap in his ass.

Obviously to stop a tyrant from coming to power. Any tyrant who would come to power in America would need popular support initially. Small arms can fight a military force who wont use mass bombing, which is the case to any would be tyrant in America.

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
Why do I think owning a gun is bad? Because it's owning a device intended to kill. Civilians shouldn't and don't need to kill.

This presumes I am opposed to killing people. I am not opposed to killing people. I am opposed to murdering people. We need tools to kill people at the time when it is neccesary to kill people. Such times do arise, wars, civil war, criminals etc.

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
How do you secure liberty by having everyone around you becoming a deadly threat?

Virtually EVERYONE I know drives a car. Many, many, many, many more people die every year from car accidents then gunfire. I suppose you want to ban cars? They are only a threat if they intend to harm me. The stranger down the street with a shotgun does not want to hurt me, why would he? Further, criminals will have guns no matter what, you secure your own liberty by having a gun to protect yourself from them.

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
Liberty is a state of mind -- I don't know about you, but when I'm around people with guns I don't feel very "safe" or embracing liberty. Especially when you've got people like Ben, CivNation, Ned, and Agathon in this world. There are crazy people, guns are very dangerous.

I feel safer knowing many patriots in America armed to the teeth. If **** ever hits the fan, we will have to rely on them. Liberty is not a state of mind. Liberty is freedom from coercive force. We agree some forms of coercive force are neccesary, this is why we have laws. We have an army to stop other countries from using coervice force on us. Guns can be used to stop the goverment from exerting coercive force, if it ever betrays the constitution.

[Ben Kenobi]

I have never hunted.

I just think, on a personal level, people who put themselves in a position where the animal can never win and then call it "hunting" are disgusting individuals. They're pathetic on many levels.

Well of course you believe that. You've never hunted.

Guns are not bad because they are macho. Guns are banned because they are designed to kill.

Animals? Why is it bad if they kill animals?

Some do it to feel macho, others -- like you -- would clearly do it to compensate and feel like you've got power over something.

IIRC you're quite short in height and you've got a hearing disability, so it doesn't surprise me at all that you love the feeling of control you get when you kill other helpless animals to get your rocks off.

Projecting much?