Guns don't kill people, gun owners kill people.

[Dr Kynes]

It can't fall out of your pants, etc. That is the same as Assault With A Friendly Weapon.

made that lulzier for you

 

[burgertime2010]

You read that from an Agenda rag. A talking point handed to you. Martha Stewart is "felon."If you knew of the gigantic pile of non-violent crimes that constitute felony, perhaps you could think more clearly.

The Agenda has even managed to queer the word felon. Covering your ass is a felony level crime.

And what about paying your debt to society fair and square? And what about DUI? Not a Felony, in all cases. but DUI killers often have a string of DUI conviction.

Pot possession is a felony.

I did not take this from anywhere. It's a question.....potentially a divisive one for gun people, that is all.

 

[cannabineer]

I did not take this from anywhere. It's a question.....potentially a divisive one for gun people, that is all.

Why divisive when its essential circularity is unmasked? Define the act of gun ownership as a felony, and presto.
Also, is one a felon before being convicted? Once paroled, does one remain a felon? As Doer pointed out, the term has been softened beyond utility.

 

[burgertime2010]

It seems like the gun community would logically support ones inalienable right without exception. Do not overcomplicate a simple question. A felon is a felon, I am not a dictionary. I am just curious where, if at all, gun regulations make sense or are they just bad. A parolee cannot own a firearm....is that fair? A mentally unfit person cannot as well....is that fair?

 

[cannabineer]

It seems like the gun community would logically support ones inalienable right without exception. Do not overcomplicate a simple question. A felon is a felon, I am not a dictionary. I am just curious where, if at all, gun regulations make sense or are they just bad. A parolee cannot own a firearm....is that fair? A mentally unfit person cannot as well....is that fair?

Who gets to define mental fitness? Quis custodiet custodes?

You dodged my questions about felon status. It is not at all a simple question and hinges on who gets to define felons how. The English dictionary is insufficient for this question; legal dictionaries are the minimal starting point. And my knowledge of the arcana of law in the USA isn't up to the task. Is yours?

I reject your assertion that "the gun community" (why the pejorative collective? Are we not individuals with a variety of opinion?) only supports the extremum. This gun-interested individual is left no room at all for a dissenting opinion, however mildly, in your strict schema. Reality is otherwise.

If you actually wish to discuss these things as a person to other people, first remove the dehumanizing corset of extremism and collectivity from your target enemy.

 

[Doer]

It seems like the gun community would logically support ones inalienable right without exception. Do not overcomplicate a simple question. A felon is a felon, I am not a dictionary. I am just curious where, if at all, gun regulations make sense or are they just bad. A parolee cannot own a firearm....is that fair? A mentally unfit person cannot as well....is that fair?

How stupid. A few years ago I was an un-indentified felon in this State and now I am not.....I have an MM Permit.

So, what does Felon have to do with violence or guns or potecting one family under the 2nd A? Nothing. Just arbitrary, but hey, here we are talking to a guy that doesn't realize the damn dictionary is entirely arbitrary and changes every year.

And the definition is Stupid Circle. Anything that defines itself is meaningless. Commit a felony become a felon....in that State. For Example:

I go on big motor bike rides. Just see what is a felony between CA and South Dakota. And just State lines on the road. Also, I got my civil rights restored but BATF refuses to process the applications. Not a Felon any longer, but still....

Besides, since you have asked this before you obviously crave divisiveness,.....another very stupid, anti-social, passive-aggressive word.

You attempt to sow divisiveness in bumping this thread by your own words. FAIL.

 

[Doer]

You know what? There is no such thing as the gun community. Another bunch of divisive horse shit.

 

[burgertime2010]

You know what? There is no such thing as the gun community. Another bunch of divisive horse shit.

Look, you obviously want a kiss ass chorus to feed you compliments like some Sultan. I respect your intelligence, but at the point where I ask a question and you respond with no heart, no fucking ability to show me where you draw the line. I am not trying to insult you...even though you don't care. I resent you being evasive. You know what I am asking and intentionally misdirecting the focus. Relax, and just say how you feel for once. Where is the line????

 

[FreedomWorks]

Look, you obviously want a kiss ass chorus to feed you compliments like some Sultan. I respect your intelligence, but at the point where I ask a question and you respond with no heart, no fucking ability to show me where you draw the line. I am not trying to insult you...even though you don't care. I resent you being evasive. You know what I am asking and intentionally misdirecting the focus. Relax, and just say how you feel for once. Where is the line????

The line is when you try to put gun owners in a group. That opens the window to put labels on people, and then ultimately demonize us as outcasts. "What a bunch of weird people gun owners are. They must be a bunch of crazy people. Who do they want to kill? This second amendment is turning people into psychopaths." etc, etc. Liberals do it all the time.

 

[burgertime2010]

You know what? There is no such thing as the gun community. Another bunch of divisive horse shit.

I crave to know why the same pitiful character assaults are necessary? I crave to get perspective, there are divides in every issue. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." Elanor Roosevelt

 

[cannabineer]

I crave to know why the same pitiful character assaults are necessary? I crave to get perspective, there are divides in every issue. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." Elanor Roosevelt

Your character is not being assailed. Your premise is.

And right there you run aground on your own quote. You are projecting your emotion on the three of us (Doer, FW, me) who have called you on a wrong assumption. You have the option instead of engaging the issues and premises. I am waiting to see that.

"The gun community" is a phantom, a deliberate demonization. What there is instead is a rather diverse and large number of "many individual gun owners". If you want a meaningful debate, begin to define your terms, and engage your interlocutors on the issues and particulars.

 

[burgertime2010]

The line is when you try to put gun owners in a group. That opens the window to put labels on people, and then ultimately demonize us as outcasts. "What a bunch of weird people gun owners are. They must be a bunch of crazy people. Who do they want to kill? This second amendment is turning people into psychopaths." etc, etc. Liberals do it all the time.

What is the politically correct nomenclature for gun owners? you are a group because you own guns....that is not demonizing. I don't understand what is demeaning. No answer needed. Thanks.

 

[Doer]

Look, you obviously want a kiss ass chorus to feed you compliments like some Sultan. I respect your intelligence, but at the point where I ask a question and you respond with no heart, no fucking ability to show me where you draw the line. I am not trying to insult you...even though you don't care. I resent you being evasive. You know what I am asking and intentionally misdirecting the focus. Relax, and just say how you feel for once. Where is the line????

Moth =- Flame. NO LINE. How many times do you have to ask? Why do you bump this thread since we answered all this before?

I am not misdirecting this fact. Asked and answered.

 

[Doer]

I crave to know why the same pitiful character assaults are necessary? I crave to get perspective, there are divides in every issue. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." Elanor Roosevelt

Divisive Horse shit, IDEAS. Worthless. I don't know you or even want to, and that goes for everyone here. PTSD.

 

[cannabineer]

you are a group because you own guns....that is not demonizing.

"oh my gawd he is one of THEM." That is the end result of the groupthink corset.

 

[Doer]

What is the politically correct nomenclature for gun owners? you are a group because you own guns....that is not demonizing. I don't understand what is demeaning. No answer needed. Thanks.

Ah Ha! There is your problem...PC.

 

[FreedomWorks]

What is the politically correct nomenclature for gun owners? you are a group because you own guns....that is not demonizing. I don't understand what is demeaning. No answer needed. Thanks.

Call us law abiding citizens that want to protect our family and property.
When you have seconds to defend your life; just know the police are minutes away.

You can call me a gun owner, just not part of a "gun community". That is inaccurate, and has nothing to do with political correctness.

 

[Doer]

What is the politically correct nomenclature for gun owners? you are a group because you own guns....that is not demonizing. I don't understand what is demeaning. No answer needed. Thanks.

Well, words matter. That is the Law. We are a group of American Citizens under the 2nd A. If I own a gun or not is none of your damn business.

THAT is the main point.

 

[burgertime2010]

Your character is not being assailed. Your premise is.

And right there you run aground on your own quote. You are projecting your emotion on the three of us (Doer, FW, me) who have called you on a wrong assumption. You have the option instead of engaging the issues and premises. I am waiting to see that.

"The gun community" is a phantom, a deliberate demonization. What there is instead is a rather diverse and large number of "many individual gun owners". If you want a meaningful debate, begin to define your terms, and engage your interlocutors on the issues and particulars.

The truth is, I apologize sincerely to anyone offended by me calling you something you don't like....it was not my intention. When I ask a question, it comes from curiousity. Do not assume that it implies antagonism. It is just a question. Let us rewind. I was curious if particular groups are withheld gun ownership like the mentally ill or violent felons or any other such group is acceptable to you? Does it violate their rights?

 

[Doer]

The truth is, I apologize sincerely to anyone offended by me calling you something you don't like....it was not my intention. When I ask a question, it comes from curiousity. Do not assume that it implies antagonism. It is just a question. Let us rewind. I was curious if particular groups are withheld gun ownership like the mentally ill or violent felons or any other such group is acceptable to you? Does it violate their rights?

Do you not see that this is ASKED AND ANSWERED? And you are simply badgering and growing small against the individuals that oppose you? Nothing has changed since last month.

Why beat this dead horse?