Lurker > BGleason22

What hasn't gone up 200% since 2019?

GranolaPanic posted...

God doesnt exist and guns dont exist because of some fictional deity. Theres already laws preventing certain people from owning guns. Is that a violation of their God given rights?

Can you admit theres a problem with gun culture in this country at the very least?

Those are the words that were written. A reasonable person would interpret that to say you were born with those rights, nobody had to grant them upon you.

There is absolutely a cultural problem in this country of abuse of nearly everything, guns included.

Did you think about what I said in the relationship between the 1st and 2nd amendment?

Do you think the people that wrote that amazing document decided to just slap that 2nd most important right in there because they just loved them some guns? Or, do you think they knew, that in order to insure the 1st amendment - The right to free speech, the freedom of the press, the right to assemble, the freedom of religion and the right to redress your grievances against the government was so insanely important that they had to write the 2nd amendment to protect the rights of the 1st?

Knowing that is my stance, hopefully you'll have a better understanding of why the 2nd is important to me despite how I've stated I personally don't feel a need to own a firearm.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

which is why we have laws. again, this is not the grand slam argument winner you seem to think it is.

Laws based on what is laid out by the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights are not laws, they are stated as god given rights at birth that no government shall make a law depriving you of.

Here is the bare bones for me:
The First amendment is so important, that the second amendment was written to insure the 1st. I would love if some of you would put some thought into that statement.

Carljank posted...

Well no I don't tend to waste my time with people such as yourself who purposefully argue in bad faith. So you are correct that conversations with YOU in particular as well as your ilk is not appealing to me in any way.

Yet you keep making attempts.

Carljank posted...

I'm not mad at you personally. I still think your premise is nonsensical. Me asking for your question to be cogent is not an unreasonable request. When you cry about deflecting because you can't back your own question up that is emotional and grounds for you to fuck all the way off my friend.

With all due respect, you've proven to me time and time again that you are not interested in having any kind of conversation.

ai123 posted...

I do not accept that guns are the guarantor nor the magical totem of freedom. I reject the notion that you are more 'free' with a gun.

I do realise that such beliefs are deeply ingrained in American culture, and I have no realistic hope that that will change any time soon.

But for a politician to worsen the situation by relaxing gun laws is despicable and makes them culpable in the deaths that result.

For me this isn't about guns at all. I've personally never had a need to own a firearm. I've said this multiple times.

It's about needing a government to tell you what you can or cannot do.

That's what I believe makes the Constitution one of the greatest documents ever created.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

so you admit that the guns, and the easy access to them, are the problem

People are the problem.

Do you see how upset that a lot of users are getting at me for just having a conversation? I'm not threatening anybody, I have no ill will, nothing nefarious. I'm challenging you to think differently once in a while, and for some people that's all it takes.

Smile, be courteous. Talk to each other. Listen to each other. Make an attempt to challenge yourself and strive to learn something new everyday. It's a simple choice.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

if guns didn't exist, would there be a dead child?
if these people weren't allowed to legally carry their pew pew sticks, would there be a dead child?

Carljank posted...

The story wouldn't exist without the presence of a gun so your question is moot.

No one would have "accidentally" beat the child to death.

What weird deflections to a simple question.

It's obvious to anyone the answer is no.

This may come as a shock, but millions of Americans lawfully open carry across the nation every single day.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

both? following the law enabled these people to bring their guns to the beach, then someone broke the law when they started using the gun.

I'll ask you the same question.. If the person didn't use the gun, would there be a story?

Cemith posted...

The fact that you think it isn't both is concerning.

It's obviously not. There wouldn't be a story if the person didn't break the law.

I sense a strawman coming.

For asking questions? A strawman is taking someone's argument and applying it to a worst case scenario.

ai123 posted...

I consider any politician of whatever party who relaxes gun laws, or does nothing to tighten relaxed gun laws, to bear some responsibility for this kind of incident.

List as many as you want, I'll condemn them all along with DeSantis.

Do you hold the same view on any type of crime or just gun crime?
I'm just trying to gauge how much freedom you think is okay and how much control you want the government to have over the people.

It's not about guns at all for me. It's about freedoms.

rynobot posted...

Debate him harder. LUL, supporting terror and murder

Not at all.

Do you believe this story was about someone following a law (open carry), or breaking a law (committing murder/manslaughter)?

ai123 posted...

Do you wouldn't hold politicians accountable for crime rates during their term of office?

Fair enough, if applied consistently.

Did a quick google search and saw Florida at #29 in the nation in gun related deaths.

So, are you applying your scrutiny consistently or with bias?

ultimate_reaver posted...

b gleason 22 in the house

Hi!

Welcome to a topic about governor's being responsible for people that commit murder in their states.

Please keep the conversation about Ron DeSantis only, thanks!

ai123 posted...

He's responsible for the laws that lead to this child's death.

Yet it was the kid and his loved ones who got to pay the price for this

Now you're just being silly.

ai123 posted...

He's responsible for this happening in his State.

No one's blaming him for what happens in North Dakota.

He's responsible for granting the same freedom that over half the nation also enjoys.

He's not responsible for an individual violating the law.

Xatrion posted...

Fucking DeSatan. Yeah, let's just let people conceal carry without any oversight. Dead, innocent children is a small price to pay for that.

26 states have permitless carry.
22 are permit only.
North Dakota is permitless for residents only and Louisiana has a few different distinctions on who can w/o a permit.

But I know it's convenient to blame DeSantis for anything and everything.

Smashingpmkns posted...

Iirc there's a male and female strip club here (Vegas) and they're separated on different floors. I don't go to strip clubs but I could be wrong. It'd be interesting to see how much money one makes over the other.

I think the evidence is plain as day. How many male strip clubs are out there and how many female strip clubs are out there. There is your answer.

Ivynn posted...

I can eat it?

Yes. Gold is biologically inert. It will pass through your system without being absorbed.

Gold leaf is used in many desserts and drinks.

Gold isn't just expensive because it's rare.

It's virtually indestructible
It's the most malleable and ductile metal.
It's a great conductor of both heat and electricity.
It has a very high melting point.
It's nontoxic.
It can alloy with more metals than any other

Great example of why 261 was nixed.

hockeybub89 posted...

Well that's just pedantry.

lol

I guess we should just snap our fingers and switch over to the free version of healthcare.

While we're at it, let's do free housing, free electricity, free water, free education, free military, free transportation, etc.

Come to think of it, why the hell do we have government at all? It's just pedantry.

hockeybub89 posted...

Good. Taxes and public programs are great. Modern society would collapse into chaos without them.

But things would objectively be a lot cheaper if we excised the corporate cancer from healthcare, which inflates healthcare costs by orders of magnitude. It is immoral to turn life-essential medicine into a commodity, a luxury. Lots of people deserve to be locked up in prison for the rest of their lives for what they have done, including the politicians in their pockets who have no incentive to fix the problem.

Do you actually believe insulin costs up to 4 figures? That a visit to the hospital is an automatic quarter million to start?

You don't need to make a case to me about universal health care.

Just stop calling it free healthcare. It's not free. It never will be free.

tripleh213 posted...

Healthcare should be free for everyone

I wish people and media would stop saying free. Free Healthcare, Free College, etc.

Nothing is free. It's still going to cost the same, it'll just be an involuntary tax.

Pitbuller_26 posted...

A lot of foolish people will learn about this the hard way listening to online grifters. Then the extremely low credit scores being affected will have them complaining about other things.

Yep. Exactly why I'm responding to this user in the first place. Not because I think they will ever listen. Rather because anyone else that reads this will know that it is about the poorest choice you could ever financially make. Take responsibility for your decisions. Don't learn this lesson the hard way.

Ar0ge posted...

What will do the government do if someone does not have a job to have their wages garnished?

Garnish future wages until the debt is paid in full.

RuneterranSnap posted...

You say knowing absolutely nothing about what put me here. Fuck off, you're done in this discussion.

I know you think you can stop paying a debt you chose to take with no repercussions. That's all I need to know.

I'm not trying to scare you, rather I'm stating facts. The more you refuse to listen, the deeper the hole you're going to dig yourself.

RuneterranSnap posted...

It's me losing my freedom either way. This is just me putting my foot down regarding being victimized. No cop will be arresting me for this.

Sounds more like a series of poor choices and not being able to take responsibility for them. Most people go through this phase of life. Trying to do so against the IRS is probably the worst possible choice you'll make. They don't fuck around. They don't care about your SOB story.

RuneterranSnap posted...

And then I find my own way to take it back, starting with stopping tax payments.

That will ultimately lead to you losing your freedom. Best of luck!

RuneterranSnap posted...

Good luck to them.

They don't need luck. It will come out of your paycheck before you even see it. It's a hard lesson to learn.

You got what you asked for, a generation of men being told that they are the problem. Meanwhile, you've got most single women looking for a confident man. You chopped their balls off.

Poorly posted...

Sober thoughts, drunk thoughts
Big differences

Clear sign of substance abuse right here.

AceMos posted...

this is ok but LGBT pride month is bad according to some ppl

Do you say the same thing about their Halloween displays in October? The 4th is the biggest holiday of the summer.

Depending on who answers there are 2,3,4,5 or 6 responses to trauma.

Fight, Flight, Freeze, Fawn, Fine, Feint

It's nice to finally see the shit posters get called out on their shit posting.

Gender plays no role in self defense. If anyone puts their hands on you, you have a right to defend yourself. Period. Educate yourselves.

Although some states use a blend of doctrines, self-defense laws generally fall into the following three categories:

1. Stand Your Ground: No duty to retreat from the situation before resorting to deadly force; not limited to your home, place of work, etc.
2. Castle Doctrine: No duty to retreat before using deadly force if you are in your home or yard (some states include a place of work and occupied vehicles)
3. Duty to Retreat: Duty to retreat from a threatening situation if you can do so with complete safety

35 states are Stand your Ground, while only 15 still have duty to retreat laws on the books.

Enclave posted...

Source. Show me a source where let's say Burger King is raising orphans and enslaving them to work in restaurants to serve us food in the USA please.

I provided the source in my first response. You seem to be having a hard time keeping track of what I'm responding to, I haven't said anything about corporations. You claimed that the state has perfectly capable systems to take care of people without parents.

I've provided evidence showing the state absolutely does not have a capable system. In fact it's a predatory and abusive system.

You continue to scoff at the thought that people under state control could become slaves. It's happening today, to children! Not just slavery, but sex trafficking.... And you want to continue to argue.

Enclave posted...

Or you don't understand the painfully obvious point I'm making in that we're not going to make humans wards and slaves of corporations when we already have systems in place for how we deal with humans who lack parents. The problems with that system are another matter entirely, I am starting to understand that this apparently is a difficult concept for some to grasp.

The system that you are talking about is CURRENTLY doing exactly what you say they wouldn't do...

Enclave posted...

Because we don't have the foster system perfect doesn't mean we haven't figured out as a society what to do with children who have no family. What an absolutely asinine attempt at a "gotcha".

A predatory and abusive system means that we haven't figured it out.
It's sad that you can't see that and instead think it's an attempt to win at the internet.

VideoboysaysCube posted...

White knight? I didn't say she's innocent. She deserves all the punishment he got and more. But it's the job of the school and police/lawyers to determine what the consequences should be. Unless you want to argue that vigilantism is perfectly acceptable.

The law says you have a right to defend yourself.

Her slap was simple assault and battery. A crime.
His slap was self defense. Not a crime.
Simple.

Enclave posted...

Source? There's plenty of kids that don't have parents and they're not raised to be cheap slave labour so why would these people be?

Enclave posted...

The State, just like if a baby is born to a woman who dies in child birth who has no other family.

This is stuff we already figured out as a society, humans have rights regardless of who they're born from.

Have we already figured this out as a society? I think you've got your head in the sand about this:

National Foster Youth Institute recently estimated that 60 percent of child sex trafficking victims have been within foster care (or another part of the larger child welfare system).

Compared to their peers, former foster youth are more likely to end up in prison. One in five former foster youth nationwide are homeless at 18. Seventy percent of female former foster youth are pregnant before their 21st birthday. 61.4% of Foster students graduated HS in 2022 compared to 87.3% for non-foster students. Under 3 percent of all former foster youth go on to obtain a college degree eventually.

Humble_Novice posted...

Careful now, mods don't like it when you call Black Republicans that. I once got modded for giving Clarence Thomas that exact epithet.

You shouldn't call anyone an ethnic slur.

Don't put your hands on people, they have a right to defend themselves. Gender plays no role, everyone is equal. Simple.