Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Editorials & Other Articles
In reply to the discussion: Bill Moyers: "NRA turned 2nd amendment into a cruel and deadly hoax" [View all]Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)28. A question for you.
Wholly unresponsive. Which means, I suppose, that Atypical Liberal agrees with me. And the purposes of boats and campers is not "killing people", which is the sole purpose of automatic weapons.
It's quite responsive. You want to justify firearm ownership through need. In this country, we don't have to justify the things we choose to buy.
Yes, firearms are for killing, and yes, that is what the second amendment is about.
So what? We are speaking of civilians, not military.
Yes, but the whole point of the second amendment is to put military-grade small arms in the hands of civilians so that they can function as military forces and counter military force.
Civilians should not need to protect themselves. That's the job of the police.
OK, you are showing yourself to be woefully ignorant here. Police are almost never present during the commission of crimes. They show up after the fact to gather evidence, interview witnesses, and aid in the prosecution. Furthermore, the police are under absolutely zero legal obligation to protect anyone not directly in their custody.
The fact is, even if every firearm vanished tomorrow, there would still be violent crimes, and people would be victimized without a police officer there to protect them.
You can wish that there was no violence in the world, but there has been violence in the world for all of recorded history. Ultimately, it is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family. If you want to abdicate that responsibility to someone else, that is your choice and I respect that. But you won't be making that choice for me.
I don't know. I do not see any reason for concealed carry. If you can give me a better reason than "I need a penis substitute", then I'd be happy to hear it.
Right, because everyone who wishes to use a tool to protect themselves from violence really is looking for a penis substitute. How condescending.
A question for you:
Do you believe that women who carry concealed weapons are carrying them as "penis substitutes"?
It's quite responsive. You want to justify firearm ownership through need. In this country, we don't have to justify the things we choose to buy.
Yes, firearms are for killing, and yes, that is what the second amendment is about.
So what? We are speaking of civilians, not military.
Yes, but the whole point of the second amendment is to put military-grade small arms in the hands of civilians so that they can function as military forces and counter military force.
Civilians should not need to protect themselves. That's the job of the police.
OK, you are showing yourself to be woefully ignorant here. Police are almost never present during the commission of crimes. They show up after the fact to gather evidence, interview witnesses, and aid in the prosecution. Furthermore, the police are under absolutely zero legal obligation to protect anyone not directly in their custody.
The fact is, even if every firearm vanished tomorrow, there would still be violent crimes, and people would be victimized without a police officer there to protect them.
You can wish that there was no violence in the world, but there has been violence in the world for all of recorded history. Ultimately, it is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family. If you want to abdicate that responsibility to someone else, that is your choice and I respect that. But you won't be making that choice for me.
I don't know. I do not see any reason for concealed carry. If you can give me a better reason than "I need a penis substitute", then I'd be happy to hear it.
Right, because everyone who wishes to use a tool to protect themselves from violence really is looking for a penis substitute. How condescending.
A question for you:
Do you believe that women who carry concealed weapons are carrying them as "penis substitutes"?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bill Moyers: "NRA turned 2nd amendment into a cruel and deadly hoax" [View all]
flamingdem
Jul 2012
OP
I think Justice Stevens' Dissent in Heller is an excellent discussion of 2nd Amendment.
Hoyt
Jul 2012
#4
their point is that the 2nd amendment is very specifically written to address
magical thyme
Jul 2012
#34
and the dissenters evaluation of the decision is also an interesting read
magical thyme
Jul 2012
#31
A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Fortinbras Armstrong
Jul 2012
#27