K I'm stupid. But why ? Why do you have a right to complain about what New York does, when New-Yorkers support the ban, assuming the ban isn't unconstitutional (because current case law suggests that is is constitutional)? I'm well aware of your ability to insult others; I question your ability to logically articulate a fucking reason WHY. So tell me. WHY ? Put up or shut up.
Gun control
- Thread starter Saladus
- Start date
- 6,338
- 7,144
Lol. I could sit here and make an equally stupid argument: you don't know me in real life, and nothing that I write affects you in any way. So why so you feel like you need to complain about what I say? (It seems like you're beginning to have a break down. Take a break if you need it.)
/shrug. This is a msg board that I come to on my free time to fuck around. If you want to argue with me using reasons, feel free. But if the 1-liner insults are all you have, let me know and I'll avoid engaging you in this discussion.
- 6,338
- 7,144
The only thing you engaged is your stupidity overdrive!
/zing
I love that you couldn't answer that one mock question. You bitch for four pages bc of an incorrect belief that we were making a statement we never made, you come back with a stupid argument about no one should say shit if they don't live in the state, but hypocritical old libtard (!) is guilty of the same thing. So it's ok for you to go on a message board and bitch about things that don't affect you, but it's wrong for us to bitch about things that actually indirectly and directly affect us. Got it! Thanks bro!
This was my original statement:
Tuco took that to mean that a state banning guns would result in that state crossing borders to take your guns. That was not my intent, and it was my fault for not correcting him. The point I was TRYING to make, is that alarmist retards (you) thinking that 1 state banning guns will somehow take us down the slippery slope that would result in everyone's constitutional rights being violated. That, i know for a fact, you did say.
- 6,338
- 7,144
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 44,797
- 93,652
He must of had a shitty or no lawyer at all. FOPA should of protected him from that.
Ignatius
#thePewPewLife
- 4,626
- 6,143
Ask Chicago. Their sop seems to be blaming the lack of laws in surrounding areas.
Not to start an argument, because I really don't have the time to engage in one, but can you elaborate on your previous point? Why does it matter what state he's in? Are you saying his position would only be valid if he was a NY resident?
Gladly. A state passes a law. That law only binds those who are residents of that state. If the law is unconstitutional, then all Americans have an interest in raising a stink and opposing that law, because an unconstitutional law is infringing on the rights of a fellow American. But if that law is NOT unconstitutional, then that law has been legally passed by a democratically elected legislature of that state, which in turn means that that law is representative of the will of the people of that state (an assumption backed up by the fact that an overwhelming majority of New-Yorkers support the AWB). So if the people of New York wants to pass an AWB, and elects a legislature that passes an AWB, and that AWB is not unconstitutional and only affects residents of New York, then he, as an outsider, has no right to bitch about how New York citizens chose to regulate their own state.
This isn't even getting into his slippery slope argument, that somehow what happens in New York or Colorado would infringe on the rights of all Americans, regardless of your residence.
- 6,338
- 7,144
I honestly feel like you're a dopey high school kid who just finished his first class in government. You seem so proud to explain a few basic concepts, and are so excited to jump in and explain things that I'm pretty sure we all understand perfectly well, that you literally invent arguments and then attack people for them.
Beyond that, your point that *I* have no right to bitch about what happens in NY is pure idiocy. That's just so fucking idiotic that I can't put words to it. As I previously said, if I have no right (interesting use of a word there) to bitch about what happens in NYS because I'm not a resident of that state, then you have no business complaining about anything that I write on the internet, because we do not live in the same state and nothing I write in any way affects you. Oh, but it's ok for *you* to bitch about something you don't like, but it's not ok for *me* to bitch about things I don't like? Wow. But I have to appreciate the complete douchiness of your liberalism. You gladly support states taking away constitutional rights from citizens, but you don't support my right to bitch about it. Honestly get fucked, people like you are the worst, and you're just a fucking idiot.
TL;DR: You are a thick headed imbecile. I sincerely hope that you haven't convinced yourself that you've raised some sort of valid point. You haven't. And you are honestly just so fucking stupid that it's confusing. I feel like I'm being trolled. Your brain is as useless as Amy Winehouse's uterus.
- 6,338
- 7,144
Wait, soysauce, can you please re-state your point and explain why anyone who isn't a resident of the affected state shouldn't be concerned with events that happen in that state?
Great. I see I've finally gotten you to engage that grey-matter you call a brain and actually put up in a discussion instead of spouting your bullshit 1 sentence insults, so let's have at it. My beef with you is not that you think the law is stupid. I agree with you that the laws passed by these states are stupid. But my biggest beef with you is encapsulated in this statement, so I'd really appreciate it if you could explain yourself:
This was in response to ME telling you to calm the fuck down, because the law was simply something that New Yorkers wanted, and not a Federal action that in any way has any effect on you.You_sl said:
Your interest in this discussion isn't simply the fact that you think the law is ill-advised. Your problem is that you think what happens in New York and Colorado equates to "the government" coming to take YOUR guns. What happens in 1 state has no effect on what happens to a citizen of another state. I've been reading this fucking thread long enough to remember every single bit of your utter stupidity. First, you bitch that the FEDS WILL TAKE YOUR GUNS. When I keep trying to tell you that there is absolutely ZERO chance that the feds would revive the AWB, you try to refute my statements by citing to STATE GOVERNMENTS banning guns in accordance to the will of their constituents. The only fucking logical conclusion is that YOU THINK WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS STATE HAS ANY CHANCE OF AFFECTING YOU PERSONALLY, as if this is, in YOUR words, some "large trend" that would infringe on people's constitutional rights.
Now to your dumbfuck constitutionality argument. You think it's unconstitutional. I don't think it's unconstitutional. Now what? Do we agree to disagree ? No, because the facts are on my side dipshit. The SCOTUS has not spoken recently on the constitutionality of an assault weapons ban. Heller is the leading case on gun rights, and that case only dealt with handguns. The second Heller case (dealing with DC's AWB) was decided by the appellate court in 2011, and that decision upheld the constitutionality of an AWB. The courts also did not strike down the last AWB passed in the 90s. Knowing all this, the only conclusion an objective, non-retarded observer can conclude is that an AWB IS CONSTITUTIONAL. Just because you scream and bitch and cry your salty tears does not make a law unconstitutional. Get that through your fucking head.
Your move, bra.
Springbok
Karen
- 9,039
- 12,636
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,485
- 73,569
False. You already destroyed that strawman and everyone laughed at you
I tell him he has nothing to worry about because what happens in New York has no effect over him. He responds by telling me I'm dead wrong, and that what is happening is a larger trend of people getting screwed out of their constitutional rights. I interpret that as him feeling that HIS rights are threatened, because other states are passing AWBs. Maybe you have more insight than I do; by all means, give me your translation.
khalid
Unelected Mod
- 14,071
- 6,775
How many times can we say that is flat out false before you listen or at least drop this silly argument?
1) It effects people because they might have to travel through NY.
2) It effects you if you might possibly move to NY. For example the current AWB means I won't be able to take a teaching position in NY.
3) It effects you if you have friends in NY. I can no longer bring my guns with me if I visit friends in NY.
4) The more state laws that pass something, puts pressure on the national level to do the same thing. These laws become the "norm" and states without it are seen as abnormal. Marijuana laws and other issues show this happening (in that case, for the good).
Again, NO ONE thinks that the NY law is going to have NY cops going into MO and taking guns. You keep throwing out that silly strawman.
Not good enough. If you have friends in New York that have an AW, then my sincere sympathies to your friends. The rest are not good enough. People who willingly subject themselves to the jurisdiction of another state obviously must also subject themselves to the regulations of that state. Been happening for decades.
A federal AWB will never be passed in the near future. Stranger things can happen, but with this Congress, I'm not losing any sleep on it. If such AWB passes in the next 5 years, feel free to change my avatar into a squirting penis with an "I TOLD YOU SO" watermark or something, I don't care.
As to "my silly strawman", it was my mistake for not correcting Tuco's interpretation of what I wrote. So I'll go down on record saying that I'm not suggesting that a NY ban would result in a NY cop going to a neighboring state to take anyone's guns. But what I AM saying, is that NY ban, or a CO ban, will in no way directly threaten the rights of a citizen in any other state.
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 42,495
- 50,685
