Reply With Quote
Nope, especially since you felt the need to add the last line.
It's not hypocrisy. It's stupid to show your guns with SN in clear view, but it's not the same as having a national gun registry. Compare it to showing a picture of your kid and being against forced photos of your kid being sent to the federal government. Choice is always different than force. There's no hypocrisy in that. You can offer up your DNA sequence online and yet be against a national DNA registry.
Nope, especially since you felt the need to add the last line.
you are crediting these people with a nuanced opinion on the topic that they are intellectually incapable of having
these are very dumb people who build an iden y around guns because they have nothing else to talk about. they dont oppose a registry because of their belief in choice of disclosure, they oppose it because the other dumb s on ar15.com and the people they follow on facebook and twitter oppose it because the nra opposes it because theyre trying to sell more guns.
You're painting all of them with a broad brush of ignorance. If the opinion is valid, then their stance isn't hypocrisy. You don't know them all personally so you cannot say what they know and don't know.
That's a pretty closed minded approach. I understand it makes dealing with the unknown easier for lazy people but it always ends up being wrong.these are very dumb people who build an iden y around guns because they have nothing else to talk about. they dont oppose a registry because of their belief in choice of disclosure, they oppose it because the other dumb s on ar15.com oppose it because the nra opposes it because theyre trying to sell more guns.
It's opposed for reasons you don't understand because, as you admitted, you know nothing about the FOPA. Educate yourself first. Pass judgement second.
A person doesn't need to know the history of the BoR to believe in the freedom of the press, or due process. Some of these things are intuitive.
lol this holier than thou bull
ill be sure to save this post and quote it every time you paint the lib s with a broad brush. i bet you seriously think youre better than that
I haven't called the libs hypocrites for believing what they believe. You're just railing against something you've admitted you haven't even tried to understand. You're basically what you're accusing them of being, ignorant of your cause, and ironically that makes you a hypocrite, or hypercrite, whichever since you seem to be tilting a bit.
1 - I don't
2 - I don't
3 - I don't
4 - I don't
And I suspect most gun owners are like me. The ones you're referring to are the redneck minority.
Omg...
Do you own a vehicle that is registered? Do you own a home? A boat with a motor?
This is absolutely the worst practical argument ever.
Last edited by pgardn; 12-21-2016 at 11:41 AM.
People do this with cars as well. But they don't when registered. And not all gun owners mind a registry and strict classes for any sort of ownership.
I will ask you the question since you seem to support it.
What does the registration of legal guns and gun owners accomplish?
What could it be used for?
Omg...
Bill of Rights
Because the Bill of Rights addresses all of those things you just mentioned, no? Exactly, don't be an idiot.
I've owned guns most of my adult life:
1. I don't talk about them much
2. I'm not on Fb or any other social crap
3. I don't have any stickers on any of my vehicles, and I don't own a pickup
4. ... not me...
sounds like a solid argument against having a muslim registry
i dont think the bill of rights protects against the government tracking who owns what guns
the bill of rights has freedom of press, but you still need press credentials.
Someone that supports it still needs to explain why it's needed and how it should be used.
*crickets*
any kind of registration list would only affect law-abiding gun owners, anybody that thinks differently isn't too smart.
The idea of a registry based on religion is so Orwellian that it merits no real discussion. It will fall by the wayside just like the swamp, the wall and locking her up.
The FOPA does. Do you want to repeal it?
agreed
the FOPA is not the bill of rights, which is what you and TSA immediately brought up. the FOPA can easily be repealed in full or in part. i have no issue with repealing the registry prohibition
Come on Philo, context. Jesus Christ.
The 1st and 2nd Amendments are in the BoR and mention freedom of speech and right to keep and bear arms. Nothing mentions right to drive a car, own a house, a boat..
No one said the BoR prohibits a registry, but "infringed upon" means just that, and the precursor to infringement is tracking. Do I have to keep saying that and if so are you going to red herring more stupid ing Muslim tears over it?
Do you want to repeal the FOPA? Have you read it? It was enacted as a 2nd Amendment protection concern.
i'm aware
i think this is where we disagree, i think its a reach. its a slippery slope argument.No one said the BoR prohibits a registry, but "infringed upon" means just that, and the precursor to infringement is tracking.
sorryDo I have to keep saying that and if so are you going to red herring more stupid ing Muslim tears over it?
like i said above, it can be repealed in full or in part with simple legislation. i have no issue with repealing the registry prohibitionDo you want to repeal the FOPA? Have you read it? It was enacted as a 2nd Amendment protection concern.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
