Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
The guns are stolen property. It's illegal to be in possession of stolen property. This isn't complicated.
|
Lets try this again.
You defined illegal ownership as 'People who buy guns from the trunks of cars', therefore you must be stating that all guns sold out of trunks are illegal. I then told you that private sales are not regulated in the state of texas, therefore if someone sells me a gun out of the trunk of his car, this does not make the gun illegal. You then restated that you are implying that guns sold out of trunks of cars are illegal, which I again told you is false. This must be more complicated to you than it is to me if you're unable to understand that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
You think background checks don't effect people that don't pass?
|
No, because people that couldn't pass a background check can buy guns just about anywhere else.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
A nuke is a weapon and the only way that you seem to register the seriousness of the situation is by comparing it to it's ultimate interpretation.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
"You're delusional if you believe *insert exaggerated and incorrect interpretation of what I said here*" is still an attempt t call me delusional.
|
do you believe that all ex-cons strictly obey gun laws? If you do, then guess what? You would be delusional. That's not an insult, that's reality.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Why? because you can't be imprisoned because you could commit a crime. Intent alone cannot convict and that's as it should be. The funny thing is that if you read into your argument, either people are trustworthy or they should be in jail. Do you understand the concept of why black and white thinking is wrong?
|
First off, you should know better than anyone that intent alone can convict. You've posted about these things under the Bush admin many times. Are all of your claims then false? Secondly, whether people are trustworthy or not is irrelevant. It's all about actions so I'm hardly on the black and white line with this argument.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
You trust an ex convict found guilty of using a gun to have a gun. I call bs.
|
call whatever you like. I've known a few that I would trust with a gun, simply because i've actually got to know them, but that's beside the point. Whether they are trustworthy or not is also irrelevant because if the ex-con really wants a gun, he's going to get a gun. Nothing you, or the government, can do to stop him.