Absolute Proof Liberalism is a Mental Disorder

[El Kabong]

Gee, Lyle, you have a knack for turning any discussion into a long, protracted debate. But I have the patience of neither Kirk or Miles so I will just leave this issue with my last rebut and of course you're free to reply.
If one imposes anything on the others, then that's not a melting pot, at least not the melting pot envisioned by your forefathers which was supposed to be an equal amalgam of all. And so the melting pot you're talking of is not the melting pot your forefathers had in mind. But be fair to you, their principles were too idealistic, or utopian and like all idealism and utopia, they're probably not practical...

What are you debating? All I ask is for those coming to the United States (ESPECIALLY those fleeing a bloodthirsty dictator) is that they accept and respect the laws of the land rather than expecting Americans to bend to the desires of immigrants and refugees.....surely this is not too much to ask?

[Master]

Gee, Lyle, you have a knack for turning any discussion into a long, protracted debate. But I have the patience of neither Kirk or Miles so I will just leave this issue with my last rebut and of course you're free to reply.
If one imposes anything on the others, then that's not a melting pot, at least not the melting pot envisioned by your forefathers which was supposed to be an equal amalgam of all. And so the melting pot you're talking of is not the melting pot your forefathers had in mind. But be fair to you, their principles were too idealistic, or utopian and like all idealism and utopia, they're probably not practical...

What are you debating? All I ask is for those coming to the United States (ESPECIALLY those fleeing a bloodthirsty dictator) is that they accept and respect the laws of the land rather than expecting Americans to bend to the desires of immigrants and refugees.....surely this is not too much to ask?

So if the laws were changed to ban all guns from your country you would accept and respect them?

[El Kabong]

Gee, Lyle, you have a knack for turning any discussion into a long, protracted debate. But I have the patience of neither Kirk or Miles so I will just leave this issue with my last rebut and of course you're free to reply.
If one imposes anything on the others, then that's not a melting pot, at least not the melting pot envisioned by your forefathers which was supposed to be an equal amalgam of all. And so the melting pot you're talking of is not the melting pot your forefathers had in mind. But be fair to you, their principles were too idealistic, or utopian and like all idealism and utopia, they're probably not practical...

What are you debating? All I ask is for those coming to the United States (ESPECIALLY those fleeing a bloodthirsty dictator) is that they accept and respect the laws of the land rather than expecting Americans to bend to the desires of immigrants and refugees.....surely this is not too much to ask?

So if the laws were changed to ban all guns from your country you would accept and respect them?

Well the Second Amendment says that is a right the government CANNOT infringe upon....so if the government DID do that then it would become even more important that I own firearms.

Honestly, how difficult is that to understand?

[Master]

Gee, Lyle, you have a knack for turning any discussion into a long, protracted debate. But I have the patience of neither Kirk or Miles so I will just leave this issue with my last rebut and of course you're free to reply.
If one imposes anything on the others, then that's not a melting pot, at least not the melting pot envisioned by your forefathers which was supposed to be an equal amalgam of all. And so the melting pot you're talking of is not the melting pot your forefathers had in mind. But be fair to you, their principles were too idealistic, or utopian and like all idealism and utopia, they're probably not practical...

What are you debating? All I ask is for those coming to the United States (ESPECIALLY those fleeing a bloodthirsty dictator) is that they accept and respect the laws of the land rather than expecting Americans to bend to the desires of immigrants and refugees.....surely this is not too much to ask?

So if the laws were changed to ban all guns from your country you would accept and respect them?

Well the Second Amendment says that is a right the government CANNOT infringe upon....so if the government DID do that then it would become even more important that I own firearms.

Honestly, how difficult is that to understand?

That is a no then. You would not respect and accept the law of the land.

[El Kabong]

That is a no then. You would not respect and accept the law of the land.

Master, it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for that to be the "law of the land" as it is against the law for the Federal or State government to make firearms illegal....again, how is that so difficult to comprehend?

[Master]

That is a no then. You would not respect and accept the law of the land.

Master, it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for that to be the "law of the land" as it is against the law for the Federal or State government to make firearms illegal....again, how is that so difficult to comprehend?

So you government can not restrict gun ownership to its citizens?

[El Kabong]

That is a no then. You would not respect and accept the law of the land.

Master, it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for that to be the "law of the land" as it is against the law for the Federal or State government to make firearms illegal....again, how is that so difficult to comprehend?

So you government can not restrict gun ownership to its citizens?

Certain licenses can be denied, if you're a convicted felon you can't own or even hold a gun. It's not an absolute.....unless you're a law abiding citizen.

[pacfan]

That is a no then. You would not respect and accept the law of the land.

Master, it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for that to be the "law of the land" as it is against the law for the Federal or State government to make firearms illegal....again, how is that so difficult to comprehend?

Just one question. Just for the sake of argument, let's say if the people decides to repeal the 2nd and calls for an amendment to the constitution and suppose the people vote overwhelmingly for the repeal, will you fully accept that? But no, I'm not trying to put you on the spot or anything like that.

[El Kabong]

Just one question. Just for the sake of argument, let's say if the people decides to repeal the 2nd and calls for an amendment to the constitution and suppose the people vote overwhelmingly for the repeal, will you fully accept that? But no, I'm not trying to put you on the spot or anything like that.

Now THAT could happen in reality...it's highly doubtful that it would, but that's not the question you asked so I'll stick to answering that question.



IF what you propose actually happened in the United States then I would with a clear conscience become a criminal and keep my firearms because I as an individual believe that it is a God given right that I'm allowed to defend myself however I deem necessary. I would not offer myself up to be jailed or punished, I would merely resist by inaction.....lest it be necessary to resist by force.


Likewise I would have not abided by the 18th Amendment either.