| Author |
|
Marcio Ferreira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 September 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 3:53pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Steven Myers, I fully agree. Government is necessary, only it should be kept small. In my opinion, gun control is not one of the things that government would do right.I do not share the point of view of the extreme libertarian.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30906
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:13pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Marcio, that's exactly the point. You don't want the government to squash the rights of citizens who want to own whatever and however many firearms they want to own. You DO, however want that same goverment to squash the rights of a gay couple that want to be married. You want the goverment to control whatever bigoted agenda you support, but want them to stay out of your interests. It's hypocritial.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30906
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:15pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Government is necessary, only it should be kept small. In my opinion, gun control is not one of the things that government would do right. ************ And allowing a man that has been investigated twice by the FBI to purchase automatic weapons is "doing it right?!?"
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Marcio Ferreira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 September 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:35pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Brian Miller,Since you are saying things about what I think and I don't recall giving you a power of attorney to do so, let me clarify.
What is the difference, for you, of a legal civil union that has exact the same rights/ obligations of a marriage? Is just the word? Is it the religious aspect? I remember that thread and someone (not you apparently) said that it would be too dificult impossible to attain that goal (exact same rights/ obligations between civil union and marriage). Well, I am not a specialist on laws, I just things that it would be the right thing to do. The reason is because "marriage" is a religious institution, not a civil one. The word come from the union a male and a female to share genetic material and produce children. If the matter is to have same sex union recognized by society, I am all for it (remember, same legal rights/obligations).
Now, please, if you want to discuss in private, I am all ears. But don't start saying what I think or don't think without my permission. It is obvious that you are trying to attack me and this is not nice.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Marcio Ferreira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 September 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:40pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
And allowing a man that has been investigated twice by the FBI to purchase automatic weapons is "doing it right?!?"+++ Exactly. If the government cannot do right its basic function (provide security) and arrest the people that are a danger to others, why do you think they would do gun control right? Remember that the terrorists in Paris did not have a lot of trouble obtaining guns illegaly. The only thing government control on gun ownership would achieve is to prevent decent, honest and law abiding citizens to obtain one. All others would find a way and would get their guns no matter what.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30906
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:44pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
You said it far better than I ever could, Marcio. Just like last time. In the case of this thread, you want the government to grant gay couples a civil union, NOT a marriage. You want the government to tell gay couples how to live their lives as a couple. At the same time, you want the same government to leave people that want to by firearms alone, because the government interferes too much. You want the government to interfere when it suits your bigoted purposes.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30906
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:45pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
And allowing a man that has been investigated twice by the FBI to purchase automatic weapons is "doing it right?!?" +++ Exactly. ****************** My god, man! Do you even hear yourself? |
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30906
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:47pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
The only thing government control on gun ownership would achieve is to prevent decent, honest and law abiding citizens to obtain one. All others would find a way and would get their guns no matter what. ************** Where were all the "decent, honest and law-abiding citizens" that carry firearms when this fuckstick came in and killed dozens of people and wounded more of them? More guns sure as shit didn't save the day then did it?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Marcio Ferreira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 September 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:49pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
See how political correctness and the insistence on not address radical Islam as the great evil that is for the world contributed to the massacre in Orlando:
- The shooter, Omar Mateen, worked for a security company that has many contracts with the federal government, G4S. Nevertheless, it was not barred in any security check, even after the FBI investigated a possible link with terrorist groups;
- Mateen former work colleague, former police officer Daniel Gilroy said the guy was extremely angry and racist, and complained several times to his superiors about the same behavior. But as Mateen was a Muslim, the company declined to do anything;
- After finding out about the claims made by his colleague, Mateen began to threaten Gilroy daily, until he decided to leave the company. Mateen continued employeed until the last day of his life, when would kill 49 innocent because of his devotion to the "religion of peace".
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Skelley
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 February 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 231
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:51pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Brian Miller wrote:
| And allowing a man that has been investigated twice by the FBI to purchase automatic weapons is "doing it right?!?" |
|
|
It would have had to happen that he'd been twice cleared of the charges. It's a failure of the FBI to properly determine what he was. If he was the terrorist nut job he turned out to be, why didn't they pick up him? Even then, he did not legally purchase and automatic weapon. There are too many background checks and it take way more time to get cleared (and pay the high fees) to get one. It's not like you can show up to a gun show and pick up one in the US. The closest would be the backdoor crap, which is highly illegal... and most of that stuff (according to my LEO friends) is surplus US Army weapons that the Government lost track of. That wouldn't be covered by any amendment and would be shunned by just about everyone (except the really out there nut jobs) including the NRA.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Marcio Ferreira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 September 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:51pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Where were all the "decent, honest and law-abiding citizens" that carry firearms when this fuckstick came in and killed dozens of people and wounded more of them? More guns sure as shit didn't save the day then did it? +++ It was a gun free zone. They were doing what you expect from decent, honest and law abiding citizens, it was against the law having guns there. Look how government intervention worked well (gun free zone).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12186
|
| Posted: 13 June 2016 at 4:57pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
In the case of this thread, you want the government to grant gay couples a civil union, NOT a marriage. You want the government to tell gay couples how to live their lives as a couple. At the same time, you want the same government to leave people that want to by firearms alone, because the government interferes too much. You want the government to interfere when it suits your bigoted purposes.
***
Well said, Brian, especially the last sentence.
I am actually angry now (gun issues and religion do that to me). How can ANYONE justify strong government intervention in CONSENTING ADULTS marrying but want the government to butt out on firearms? That is beyond hypocritical!
Edited by Robbie Parry on 13 June 2016 at 4:59pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
