- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: n
Posted on 4/18/23 at 10:49 am to RazorBroncs
Posted on 4/18/23 at 10:49 am to RazorBroncs
quote:
Now spell out how this would cut down on gun violence or mass shootings IN ANY WAY.
Mainly because many don’t want to go through that trouble.
1
Posted on 4/18/23 at 10:51 am to jangalang
quote:
I have not looked this up
Of course, because you havent had a clue of anything you've talked about in this thread.
1.6 lbs per 100 rounds. Your girly arms can't handle that.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 10:56 am to jangalang
quote:
Is the ban narrowly tailored to accommomolish what is in state’s interest. Yes
You bitches can't enforce current laws, and want more...
Posted on 4/18/23 at 10:57 am to jangalang
quote:
Now spell out how this would cut down on gun violence or mass shootings IN ANY WAY.
Mainly because many don’t want to go through that trouble.
Do you not understand how fricking dumb this sounds? Criminals - by definition - do not follow the laws on the books.
What will limiting magazine capacity accomplish other than saying "we did something! Yaaaaay!"
And why do you keep referring to 50 round drums of 7.62, when that has no relevance whatsoever? Can you point me to one of these mass shooting events where that applies at all?
We're talking about actually cutting down on gun violence and mass shootings, and you keep going off on tangents that have absolutely no relevance to accomplishing that. Nothing you have suggested or implied here has been tethered in reality, it's all just feel-good "we made new rules!" bullshite. It would do absolutely nothing to curb gun violence or root out the societal problem that glorifies it.
Everything you've suggested only makes it a little harder for legitimate, law abiding gun owners. I don't know how you STILL fail to see or understand that, other than being completely disingenuous
Posted on 4/18/23 at 10:57 am to RazorBroncs
quote:
And why do you keep referring to 50 round drums of 7.62, when that has no relevance whatsoever?
Its too heavy for his girly arms
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:00 am to jangalang
quote:
Can the ban make the populace safer.
Personally, I don’t like the phrasing of this part of your framework. Passing laws based on what could make people safer seems like just about anything could pass this filter. I think I’d rework this logic so that it would say “We can reasonably say passing this restriction would better promote human prosperity and human happiness”. At any rate, the ability of gun legislation to pass this filter isn’t a clear cut “yes” and would definitely be brought into dispute.
quote:
Are there alternatives to the banned instrument for citizens to pick up instead- yes
I like this part of the framework, but dependent on the ban the answer of this would also be in dispute.
quote:
Is the ban narrowly tailored to accommomolish what is in state’s interest. Yes
I prefer my government to care about the peoples’ interest and not the state. Perhaps that’s what you meant, but I don’t think it is a matter of semantics.
This post was edited on 4/18/23 at 11:02 am
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:04 am to jangalang
quote:
You’re going to be alright I promise.
At least you admit it’s an infringement on a right.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:05 am to Centinel
quote:
At least you admit it’s an infringement on a right.
He'll have to google it.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:20 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You bitches can't enforce current laws, and want more...
They won't enforce current laws. The Michigan St. shooter is the most recent example of that.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:22 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
1.6 lbs per 100 rounds. Your girly arms can't handle that.
Ammo I toted was 9.6 pounds per 100. You’re way off, brother
Keep in mind combat load is actually 600 rounds.
Do you think it was easier to carry bandoliers of ammo all strapped around your neck or arm or 5.56 mags that nicely fit to your vest pouches? What do you reckon?
This post was edited on 4/18/23 at 11:40 am
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:25 am to Ross
quote:
Personally, I don’t like the phrasing of this part of your framework
It benefits state interests to keep the population safe.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:26 am to RazorBroncs
quote:
Everything you've suggested only makes it a little harder for legitimate, law abiding gun owners.
That's by design, and the intended gun control goal for the Left.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:34 am to jangalang
Personally, I think the state’s main function is not to promote safety but to promote an environment where life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can be enjoyed. Safety enters into that but it isn’t the only variable.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:43 am to jangalang
quote:
It benefits state interests to keep the population safe.
Its not the states job to keep you safe. Its your job.
If you rely on the State to protect you..
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:43 am to Ross
quote:
Personally, I think the state’s main function is not to promote safety but to promote an environment where life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can be enjoyed.
Correct. Liberty is paramount over safety.
Its our job to protect ourselves.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:45 am to RogerTheShrubber
So in theory you believe protests at airports are acceptable.
Noted
Noted
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:46 am to jangalang
quote:
Ammo I toted was 9.6 pounds per 100. You’re way off, brother
Youve never toted ammo in your life.
Per 100, 762 is 1.6 lbs more than 556. Youre a pussy
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:47 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Per 100, 762 is 1.6 lbs more than 556. Youre a pussy
You’re a no-nothing window licker. Stop doing this, bro.
Posted on 4/18/23 at 11:48 am to jangalang
quote:
It benefits state interests to keep the population disarmed.
I think this is what you're trying to actually say.
Page 60 of 74
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News