Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
The implication is that the guns are "illegal", so it's not only not false, but it's perfect.
|
guns are not illegal, therefore your implication is false.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Bias impacted opinions aside, that's the worst reason to get rid of a law in history. "Some people get around it, so it should be abolished".
|
Thats not what I said. Because the law affects ONLY law abiding people, it should be abolished and that those who commit criminal acts with guns should then be prosecuted.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
You're right. If the FBI finds an Islamic fundamentalist group in the US with a nuclear weapon we're SOL because they only have the weapon. It's just possession, which shouldn't be a criminal act. Just because they came upon it by illegal means and they're likely to use it to kill people doesn't mean that our police should be pursuing it.
|
a nuke is not a gun, this is a worthless argument and only shows your desperation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Stop right there, hot shot. If you're going to head in this direction I'm leaving the thread along with all my perfectly valid points because we all know how this conversation goes once it turns from factual discussion to personal insults. Are you capable of having this discussion without insulting people?
|
before you get all insulted, read the rest of the statement as it applies perfectly.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Unless you have evidence that ex-convicts who were convicted of gun crimes can pass background checks, I'll have to ask that you reexamine your answer or post some rather serious evidence.
|
A background check should not be required for the exercise or enjoyment of a right and if said convict cannot be trusted on the outside, why is he outside?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Because paying one's debt is not the same as earning trust.
|
so we're back to only letting people exercise rights when YOU trust them? can I have that power also?