15+ Dead In Texas School Shooting; 18-y.o. student Salvador Ramos Identified As Shooter

Howie

Well-known member
yes, we all pray for them, but prayers will not stop the carnage. We need legislation.
We need to stop the proliferation of ever more powerful weapons sold with little to no oversight to people with no reason to own such deadly weapons.
Legislation ... smh
 

Harry Leggs

Super Member
No. It makes them the people who take rights away.
Cannot take away what you don't have in the first place.
The granters are the ones who say what rights should be and put in place some mechanism to enforce them
King is law. A giant step backwards
. The nearest thing we have to inalienable rights, is the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights, and that isn't very close
A bunch of nobodies got together and agreed on a bunch of fictions?
. It is a set of rights that most people in most countries would agree with, and it gives a framework around which rights can be discussed.
They are still objective fiction
There is no right to abortion, and no rights for the unborn. The right to life is qualified, not absolute.
That means you can be killed for any or no reason since you have no right to life. Matter of fact you have no right to anything by your own metric unless some king or group grants you some and that can change anytime for any reason.
We have more rights now than we did a century ago, and many more than we did a millennium ago.
I don't know about that since there was a lot less laws on the books. Age of consent was down to seven for little girls in at least one state but you agree little girls have no natural rights nor do we naturally owe little girls anything.
Those rights were won in the teeth of opposition, by men and women.
They were granted by a king or group of guys.
There were religious people on both sides of that struggle.
There always is, so?
There was no sign of God, or any other deity, except in the mouths of those claiming to speak for Him or to know His mind.til
There is no sign of rights anywhere in Godless nature which would be our source under your metric. So you have no rights unless granted by the king and if the king commands you to kill babies then you are bound to the king to kill babies. The king gives and the king takes away
 

Harry Leggs

Super Member
How many guns do you own?

How about we stop selling military-styled weapons to civilians.
These are usually cosmetic. Military style is no different than regular guns. Use the same ammo etc. I see nothing about mental illness on your list. Nothing about age or high school level education. That would have disqualified this shooter but he already broke existing gun laws in Texas by carrying on a school ground.
No bump stocks, large magazines, ghost guns.
Why?
No guns for felons or anyone under a restraining order.
Covered under Brady and restraining order not a felony.
No open or concealed carry.
Most of us cannot do that anyway.
Gun purchasers should have a reason to own a gun. Like hunting.
BS this is getting sickening. Move to Korea. It sounds like you are c/p off a gun hate site.
Serious training in advance of purchase, and yearly updated training, all at the gun owner's expense.
How bout you move to Korea.
Fully fund federal research into the use and abuse of guns.
Federal research? Go away. You pay for it. How bout that. How much you make a year? Can't be much.
 
Last edited:

mikeT

Well-known member
Federal research? Go away. You pay for it. How bout that.
How about you have no authority to decide how your tax money is spent, just like the amount of authority you have (aka. none) to decide how the grocer you bought your milk from spends the money you paid him.

It's not your money any more.

How about that.
 

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
No, humans violating other's does not prove humans are the givers of rights anymore than humans taking other's lives would prove they're the givers of life.
What is the observable, practical difference between a god-given right and a human-given right?
 

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
How bout you move to Korea.
You have to demonstrate your driving proficiency to the government before they will let you drive a car.
That's driving. No such test with guns.

But then, in the US, it's too easy to do a lot of things. Like be President - no prior political experience, no prior public office, no climbing the ladder; it's just

were you born here,
are you 35 or older, and
have you lived there for at least fourteen years.

That's it - the position of most powerful person in the country calls for less experience than does promotion to assistant manager at a Burger King.
 

Harry Leggs

Super Member
How about you have no authority to decide how your tax money is spent,
Says... just another net shlub.
just like the amount of authority you have (aka. none) to decide how the grocer you bought your milk from spends the money you paid him.

It's not your money any more.

How about that.
If you don't like guns then move. Get out! You do have the authority to move your miserable behind to wherever you want.
 
Last edited:

Harry Leggs

Super Member
If you don't like how the money you willingly gave the government is spent by them, move. Get out!
I can resort to other methods to change from within. But you can always leave. Move to some place where they believe they obtain their rights from men. King is law. Types like yourself. Or that raping little girls for fun is only subjectively wrong.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Nope. Perhaps you can show me where I said that Hitler's opinion should be given equal weight. You are jumping to conclusions again, skipping what I actually say and inserting made up phrases that fit your prejudicial stereotypes. I am definitely seeing a pattern.
I also took what you have said to imply that as well. If morals are as you say relativist then how come not?
Hitler supported the killing of all Jews and you support the killing of unborn Jews.
 

BMS

Well-known member
I have no problems with guns, used and regulated appropriately.

If you don't like how the money you willingly gave the government is spent by them, move. Get out!
He doesnt like the way the government spends the money and he can vote Republican.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
This is why you believe raping and killing little girls for fun is only subjectively wrong. What do they call people with no moral compass?

There is no moral component to raping and killing little girls for fun. It is simply opinion that this sort of activity is wrong. Nothing more. Group opinion can change anytime for any reason. We have no moral responsibility to each other and any other thinking on the subject is simply comforting fiction.

Right and the right and wrong of slavery and owning people and beating them to death is not wrong in an objective sense. It is all reduced to opinion of people. Thanks for the clarification
You really have no idea what you are talking about. There is nothing "only" about subjective morality. People are still prepared to die, and to kill, to protect or promote their idea of what is right or wrong. Being subjective doesn't weaken morality at all.

What is more, those who abuse children or keep slaves are breaking the law. It is the law that hunts them down, tries, convicts and imprison them. If morality had any force outside the law, the British prime minister would have been a different person twelve months since.

Mostly our views on morality coincide, because we are all human and have a common humanity. Where our moral views differ, we will just have to manage. There is nothing special about your moral view, nor weak about mine, they are simply different. Get used to it, and step gingerly into the real world.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Cannot take away what you don't have in the first place.

King is law. A giant step backwards

A bunch of nobodies got together and agreed on a bunch of fictions?

They are still objective fiction

That means you can be killed for any or no reason since you have no right to life. Matter of fact you have no right to anything by your own metric unless some king or group grants you some and that can change anytime for any reason.

I don't know about that since there was a lot less laws on the books. Age of consent was down to seven for little girls in at least one state but you agree little girls have no natural rights nor do we naturally owe little girls anything.

They were granted by a king or group of guys.

There always is, so?

There is no sign of rights anywhere in Godless nature which would be our source under your metric. So you have no rights unless granted by the king and if the king commands you to kill babies then you are bound to the king to kill babies. The king gives and the king takes away
Umm, e don't have a king. We haven't had a king with the ability to grant or remove tights for two hundred years. You may have noticed that there are forms of government other than monarchy. They too have the ability to grant or take away rights. Who granted women the right to vote? Who freed the slaves? Who granted gay people the right to marry their partner? It wasn't the king, and it wasn't God either.
 
Top