Latest Breaking News

beevul

(12,194 posts)

67. Perhaps, but that doesn't make it right.

Reply to passiveporcupine (Reply #66)

Sat Feb 27, 2016, 06:42 PM

Feb 2016

Because the health of society often outweighs the rights of individuals.

Except when it doesn't, like in the case of constitutionally protected rights.

If it tryly is for the good of society, and cannot be done any other way, I have no problem with that.

You and your gun control pushing colleagues have a long ways to go to prove that reducing gun deaths cannot be done any other way.

I still cannot equate the right to own a gun with the right to live.

Nor can I. The right to own a gun is protected from governmental sticky fingers, while the right to life can be taken by government.

Theres no comparison in the legal sense.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

102 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

At Least Four People Killed in Shooting at Kansas Factory, Police Said [View all] tabasco Feb 2016 OP

If we will just keep cutting social services - shrinking government - all this... SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #1

Another assault weapon doing its job keeping us all safe. PatrickforO Feb 2016 #2

Just saw is up to 7. Many more injured. leftyladyfrommo Feb 2016 #3

Gun Nuttery gone wild. jalan48 Feb 2016 #4

I hope this event doesn't affect anybody's right crim son Feb 2016 #5

Yes, it would be a tragedy to infringe on my right to own a firearm for hunting, GGJohn Feb 2016 #6

We disagree. crim son Feb 2016 #7

No offense taken, GGJohn Feb 2016 #11

Correct alcibiades_mystery Feb 2016 #20

Yeah, because ignoring other opinions works so well. GGJohn Feb 2016 #21

You don't have those rights. SansACause Feb 2016 #8

I disagree. eom. GGJohn Feb 2016 #12

Please Abouttime Feb 2016 #10

Good for you, GGJohn Feb 2016 #13

I disagree strongly with your stance on guns ... LannyDeVaney Feb 2016 #15

Thank you for the insult free post. GGJohn Feb 2016 #17

And your reasonable approach should be rewarded by us anti gun folks, not attacked. randys1 Feb 2016 #53

Really appreciate that randys1. GGJohn Feb 2016 #56

"...let anyone drive a car?" beevul Feb 2016 #47

Because rjsquirrel Feb 2016 #26

Being a gun owner and hunter, do you include yourself in that analysis? Marengo Feb 2016 #29

No because I favor rjsquirrel Feb 2016 #30

Guns? Why do you need more than one? Marengo Feb 2016 #31

Various rjsquirrel Feb 2016 #33

I support a ban on handguns and semi-autos. tabasco Feb 2016 #38

I have an AR-10 chambered in .308 for deer hunting, and I can convert it to .223 by changing the GGJohn Feb 2016 #57

The betterment of society. tabasco Feb 2016 #59

The betterment of society doesn't put food on my table, GGJohn Feb 2016 #60

+10000 Cavallo Feb 2016 #77

That's essentially Robert Bork's theory of 'moral harm': friendly_iconoclast Feb 2016 #79

What? Cavallo Mar 2016 #81

Neither you nor society are harmed by someone *legally* carrying a gun in your vicinity. Period. friendly_iconoclast Mar 2016 #88

Me and my society are harmed by people legally carring guns who still should not have one every day. Cavallo Mar 2016 #92

Unless those people *physically* harm you, then you are not harmed friendly_iconoclast Mar 2016 #97

My good friend Kim Layfield died in the Racer Cafe Shooting in Seattle 3 years ago. Cavallo Mar 2016 #101

Your opinion is no more valid than those of Suzanna Hupp or John D. Green's: friendly_iconoclast Mar 2016 #102

A gun is not necessary for hunting... Marengo Feb 2016 #71

No more and no less weird than glamorized swimsuits photo spreads issues in a sports magazine LanternWaste Feb 2016 #35

That might be a trajedy for you, passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #23

What kind of firearms legislation do you support? Marengo Feb 2016 #32

It's got nothing to do with my post n/t passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #49

Why the dodge? It's the obvious question resulting from you apparent assertion... Marengo Feb 2016 #61

false dichotomy... beevul Feb 2016 #48

Nothing false about it passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #50

Of course its a false dichotomy. beevul Feb 2016 #52

I suspect you are thinking it is a false dichotomy because passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #54

No, I am thinking its false because its very obviously and clearly false. beevul Feb 2016 #55

We all have our opinions passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #58

Losing ANY rights is a tragedy. beevul Feb 2016 #64

Because of laws to protect society, many 'rights' have been lost passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #66

Perhaps, but that doesn't make it right. beevul Feb 2016 #67

Are you defending this? passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #69

Since when is pointing out objective obvious truth "defending" anything? beevul Feb 2016 #70

Follow the train of thought in the thread. passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #72

I'm not so sure. beevul Feb 2016 #74

I think you are thinking only of yourself passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #75

Do you now. beevul Mar 2016 #80

Which means you DO have a problem with some guns. That's a deal breaker. passiveporcupine Mar 2016 #82

You have got to be joking. beevul Mar 2016 #84

You offer up one instance of a rejected gun law compromise passiveporcupine Mar 2016 #85

Spin spin spin. beevul Mar 2016 #86

It was people in his own state who were part of that org passiveporcupine Mar 2016 #87

That changes nothing... beevul Mar 2016 #89

Please show me where the anti gun supporters have ever gotten everything passiveporcupine Mar 2016 #90

Then you, Sir, are blind. beevul Mar 2016 #91

No maam, ignorance of old laws does not equate to being blind passiveporcupine Mar 2016 #93

No, but ignorance of my point does. beevul Mar 2016 #94

there is really no point in continuing this because on this one issue we disagree passiveporcupine Mar 2016 #95

I said that a post or two ago. beevul Mar 2016 #96

Welcome to America Chicago1980 Feb 2016 #9

Fucking piece of shit coward. Solly Mack Feb 2016 #14

Now is not the time to talk about this Red Knight Feb 2016 #16

Scalia is dead. onehandle Feb 2016 #18

You keep saying that, GGJohn Feb 2016 #22

Look how long it took for the anti-cig thinking to take hold. This too will take hold. riversedge Feb 2016 #27

Uh huh, GGJohn Feb 2016 #37

Really? tabasco Feb 2016 #39

Full autos and Grenade launchers are allowed to own, GGJohn Feb 2016 #40

And the same very strict regulations will apply to semi-autos and handguns tabasco Feb 2016 #41

Uh huh, GGJohn Feb 2016 #42

You just keep clinging to your arsenal tabasco Feb 2016 #43

My so called arsenal, which is the wrong term, GGJohn Feb 2016 #44

Pew pew alcibiades_mystery Feb 2016 #19

3 victims dead, and the gunman; another 14 injured, 10 critically muriel_volestrangler Feb 2016 #24

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2016 #25

How about we do something innovative on this case... Archae Feb 2016 #28

Mo rjsquirrel Feb 2016 #34

LOL. beevul Feb 2016 #51

Wow, I just looked up the Kansas gun laws ... LannyDeVaney Feb 2016 #36

There's more to this story scubasteve76 Feb 2016 #45

Most insane post of the day. Doctor Who Feb 2016 #62

its just something to consider scubasteve76 Feb 2016 #63

He was an ex-felon who was shooting people at random. Doctor Who Feb 2016 #65

Fair enough scubasteve76 Feb 2016 #73

wayyyyyyy out there DustyJoe Feb 2016 #76

Kansas Gunman Issued Restraining Order at Scene of Deadly Shooting Before Killings, Cops Say Eugene Feb 2016 #46

Yep, if you don't think they'd obey it, then its discouraged to get one. Cavallo Feb 2016 #78

Turns out his ex-girlfriend bought the weapons for him madville Feb 2016 #68

Doubt it Liberty Sage Mar 2016 #83

Just another day in gun country m Initech Mar 2016 #98

These threads sicken me so much. Crunchy Frog Mar 2016 #99

Bullshit. No one is "defending mass slaughter" friendly_iconoclast Mar 2016 #100