+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

  1. #31
    Champ DawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond repute DawgyNWindow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Middle Tennessee
    Posts
    3,068

    Re: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by johnnylightnin View Post
    No. You introduced sanctuary cities into a conversation that had NOTHING to do with them. I'm pointing out that comparing the two does an extreme disservice to the seriousness of abortion. You, apparently, have no interest in defending your decision to pair the two.
    I think I was defending gun rights and making the point that restricting guns is not equal to restricting abortion. Guns don't cause murder any more than saline solution caused abortions. Murder is already illegal...by any means performed. I don't see what would be so great about a deal where we give up constitutional rights to make something illegal that will not stop even though it is made illegal. Making them illegal will not make them stop happening anyway, and they will be less safe for the mother (but equally deadly for the baby).

    Guns have nothing to do with abortion or sanctuary cities. A gun is a thing, a sanctuary city is a thing created by a law, and an abortion is an act. That was my point.

  2. #32
    2011 Pick 'Em Champion johnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond reputejohnnylightnin has a reputation beyond repute johnnylightnin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Shreevesburg
    Posts
    25,408

    Re: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow View Post
    I think I was defending gun rights and making the point that restricting guns is not equal to restricting abortion...That was my point.
    Gun deaths and abortion BOTH make any "sanctuary city" deaths statistically insignificant.
    Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle

  3. #33
    Dawg Adamant Argument Czar Guisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond repute Guisslapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In your mind and under your skin
    Posts
    19,735

    Re: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow View Post
    I think I was defending gun rights and making the point that restricting guns is not equal to restricting abortion. Guns don't cause murder any more than saline solution caused abortions. Murder is already illegal...by any means performed. I don't see what would be so great about a deal where we give up constitutional rights to make something illegal that will not stop even though it is made illegal. Making them illegal will not make them stop happening anyway, and they will be less safe for the mother (but equally deadly for the baby).

    Guns have nothing to do with abortion or sanctuary cities. A gun is a thing, a sanctuary city is a thing created by a law, and an abortion is an act. That was my point.
    Possessing a gun is an act. A fetus is a thing. Abortion is an act. A gun is a thing.

    Why does it matter in this discussion what is a “thing” and what is an “act”.

  4. #34
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    27,135

    Re: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by johnnylightnin View Post
    No. You introduced sanctuary cities into a conversation that had NOTHING to do with them. I'm pointing out that comparing the two does an extreme disservice to the seriousness of abortion. You, apparently, have no interest in defending your decision to pair the two.
    That is correct when trying to compare abortion to the 2nd Amendment. Absolute asinine comparison, unrelated to each other.

    A MUCH better scenario would be:

    Would you agree to ban capital punishment if abortion were also banned? Or vice versa. At least those two actually compare the legalized taking of human life.

  5. #35
    Champ techman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ruston
    Posts
    10,457

    Re: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2180 View Post
    How many people die from a single shot 4-10 or Remington 870? It’s always semi-automatic weapons according to the news.
    That’s kinda what I’m thinking. No reason to regulate anything like that. Also, I can bow hunt if they try to get into my hunting equipment.

  6. #36
    Champ TYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond repute TYLERTECHSAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    46,448

    Re: Champ967's proposed Constitutional amendment

    I might negotiate for states rights (by vote) determining all of the above and more. And then I would never travel to those states, nor send or spend money in those, that view life and certain actions, benefits and privileges the way I do. In fact, prior to these "votes by state" all states must build complete walls around them with checkpoints to keep others out.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

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