• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ban the fucking guns

Sailors number 1 is pretty important in the context of rate of fire to crowd density in the year 2016 compared to 1789. Those Brown Bess or long rifles would be perfectly acceptable to me in the year 2016 because you can't really conceal them and you fire 2-4 rounds a minute.
 
You may remember Pastor Swanson, whom Ted Cruz joined on stage multiple times during the primary, the pastor who has called for a return to biblical law regarding homosexuality, and who has complimented Uganda putting homosexuals to death.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 
I can't quite put my finger on it, but there does seem to be a small logical/theological gap between "homosexuality is immoral/sinful" and "kill the homosexuals."

"Religion" is not dangerous. Extremism is.
 
A return to biblical law means putting homosexuals to death

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 
Swanson and others have called for that multiple times over radio, podcast, and in public speeches.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 
Yes, let's ban guns and be more like France, because it worked well for them.

I find it odd that it's ISIS and not some random nutjob that appears to be a catalyst for this. An act of war, basically, rather than a random mass shooting.
 
Junebug said:
I can't quite put my finger on it, but there does seem to be a small logical/theological gap between "homosexuality is immoral/sinful" and "kill the homosexuals."

"Religion" is not dangerous. Extremism is.
Click to expand...

it's not a very big gap when the holy books in question expressly sanction killing the immoral/sinful homosexuals, as does the Bible and (I believe) the Koran or Hadith. It would be nice if more Muslims could get beyond those particular portions of their holy books so that such sentiments are seen as a severe aberration (as they are in Christianity).
 
deacvision7 said:
Trump already has the delegates required for the nomination. You think if he started to pivot for the general before the convention and talked about sensible gun control that they would THEN try to steal the nomination from him?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do. I think the republican establishment is looking for any excuse to nominate anyone but him. He can't pivot before the nomination has been formally issued. And, as crazy as it sounds given his general distastefulness, I think he would end up being more sensible on guns than anyone else they would try to nominate.
 
Junebug said:
I can't quite put my finger on it, but there does seem to be a small logical/theological gap between "homosexuality is immoral/sinful" and "kill the homosexuals."

"Religion" is not dangerous. Extremism is.
Click to expand...

Inherent in religious belief is the active pursuit of the logical conclusion. Otherwise, what's the fucking point
 
In regards to banning the practice of Islam and deporting Muslims, i'd rather take the step to ban handguns and assault rifles for everyone without a professional need for them, and make it a longer process to obtain hunting rifles, and shotguns.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 
ImTheCaptain said:
bueller?
Click to expand...

I think there is a 5,000 page Fasciosm! thread about the overreach of government on a semi-popular off-brand ACC school message board, but I'd have to look that up to be sure.

I think Sailor's a little closer to the mark here. Guns have a place, if for no other reason that to protect us from each other (something that the government can't do with time-sensitivity). I don't think that protection from the other guy requires high capacity mags.

I think the framers had higher expectations for "Citizens" (Term of art) in terms of responsibilities necessary to shoulder the load of the rights conferred by government version.1789. I expect that if you reincarnated the most ardent liberal (eighteenth century sense) and said "No seriously, EVERYONE will have ALL of the privileges and immunities, even the dumbs", that person would slap the taste out of your mouth. We have traded our egalitarianism for their elitism. Query if those things can coexist. Perhaps today's liberals have decided otherwise and thus want to elevate government over the individual.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
Yes, let's ban guns and be more like France, because it worked well for them.

I find it odd that it's ISIS and not some random nutjob that appears to be a catalyst for this. An act of war, basically, rather than a random mass shooting.
Click to expand...
ISIS isn't to fucking blame for this, the guy wasn't a member of ISIS and they didn't plan the attack, they didn't even take credit for it as much as they congratulated the guy...which is probably what he wanted for placing that last minute call to 911
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
In regards to banning the practice of Islam and deporting Muslims, i'd rather take the step to ban handguns and assault rifles for everyone without a professional need for them, and make it a longer process to obtain hunting rifles, and shotguns.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If the goal is to actually solve the problem, why not do both? In both cases you are altering Constitutional rights, so why isn't it okay to approach from both angles? Other than #whitechristianguilt?
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
ISIS isn't to fucking blame for this, the guy wasn't a member of ISIS and they didn't plan the attack, they didn't even take credit for it as much as they congratulated the guy...which is probably what he wanted for placing that last minute call to 911
Click to expand...

I mean, that is basically their entire strategy, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top