[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Halofan48 This is what i'm talking about milton. We provide evidence and some logical thoughts, and you just dismiss it without a second thought.

Nonsense, I contemplated your logic long before I ever entered the thread. These are the same arguments we have heard time, and time again.


What justification do you have to use others peoples behavior against me?

Quote by: Halofan48 Ugh, look milton, if there are lots of gun related crimes in the U.S., shouldn't we try to make laws to control the flow of weapons as so they are less likely to end up in the wrong hands?

They already have, many many times.


Are they enforcing all of those laws?

Quote by: Halofan48 Or are you completely ok with the fact convicted felons have been able to legally purchase weapons?

Honestly, I'm less concerned with that, than saccrificing all peoples rights to prevent it on the few occasions it's actually happened.

Quote by: Halofan48 Also, i wasn't "Waltzing around the point"

Yet here you enter another post without answering the question.


Matter of fact, i don't see you attempting to answer many of the questions presented either.


What am I to think?

Quote by: Halofan48 I simply stated that there are more than just tazers for NLWs. Then later on in my post, which you tore into pieces for reasons i can only guess, i stated that tazers were not a punishment dealt in a court of law but a defensive device for the people milton. You are allowed to own tazers. So ya, not just cops have them.

And none of this opinion even attempt to address my already stated opinion on why I disapprove.

Quote by: Halofan48 Well, milton, i just said that these were two sources that may be biased. The other links were articles covering events that took place because of the availability of a gun.

And I have stated numerous times why I think that angle is invalid, as others peoples behavior cannot be used against me in a court of law?


Why do I stipulate a "court of law", well, I'm glad you asked.


I ask that, because since Liberals are content to rest on their hypocrisy, and not attempt to pass this legislation legally ( you know, those pesky Constutional Ammendment thingies that require consent ) , that this will just end up before a Judge who will rule that in the USA, in fact, you do not have the right to use others peoples bahavior against the person whom you legislation affects.


I want to know why you Liberals think using that evidence juistifies punishing law abiding citizens is a valid concept?

Quote by: Halofan48 Also milton, if you just want to totally disregard all opposing arguments, don't debate and leave the thread.

I am only disregarding the same old drivel that has already been presented, shown to be unreasonable, illegal, unworkable, or just plain stupid.


Had you kept up with the conversation, you would know this. Well, unless, like all the other Liberals here, you are in denial, or are doing just what you claim I am doing, and disreagarding all of my valid points.

Quote by: Halofan48 People who only sit there and disagree no matter how much we present are contributing nothing to the debate.

What's to debate, you just keep citing previously cited opinion, which, as I said, has been shown to be at odds with existing laws, popular opinion, and common sense.