RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons

RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

CreativeDominant -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 3:43:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko OOPS, Mod 3 might be right, hit the deck! And oh my! joether is very intelligent and an impressive debater. Not something you see everyday. What I can't understand is why no one can seem to tackle his questions rather than resorting to baseless accusations and thoughtless opinions. No offense. The art of debate is such, the bearing is on the proof, facts and figures. Not "because I said so and neener neener". [8\|] Its not much of a debate when you can't back your opinions up with sources, Manko. Something Joether doesn't do. But he is good at telling people to crawl back under a rock. Now that there is some intelligent debate.

lovmuffin -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 3:54:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 And this is why CS should do away with the Politics and Religion discussions - they always devolve into name calling and picking whining over semantics. Get rid of them completely - we are clearly not adult enough to have such conversations. Clearly you're not an adult. You're a dog, a drunk dog. Have another martini and just enjoy the show[8D]

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 4:07:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko OOPS, Mod 3 might be right, hit the deck! And oh my! joether is very intelligent and an impressive debater. Not something you see everyday. What I can't understand is why no one can seem to tackle his questions rather than resorting to baseless accusations and thoughtless opinions. No offense. The art of debate is such, the bearing is on the proof, facts and figures. Not "because I said so and neener neener". [8\|] No, joether is verbose and articulate. Unfortunately he uses these skills to espouse positions which he has admitted were false.

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 4:45:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 And this is why CS should do away with the Politics and Religion discussions - they always devolve into name calling and picking whining over semantics. Get rid of them completely - we are clearly not adult enough to have such conversations. Actually, that's why the P&R section started originally -- to get it the hell out of the Off Topic section.

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 4:47:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldncreepy The NRA is blocking implementation of a law that would "infringe". I'm very familiar with the invention you are referring to. It's currently being used as a pawn to implement a law that is unconstitutional. I get that. And I'm sympathetic to the anti-law movement...but not the anti-market one.

oldncreepy -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 4:50:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery So tell the NRA to stop blocking guns it doesn't happen to like because they threaten their manufacturer's cartel. A short explanation of why: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armatix_iP1 Marketing this entry would make the sale of all other handguns illegal in the state of New Jersey under current law.

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 5:03:58 PM)
FR Someone asked how they tell who are the good guys with guns without concealed carry permits. This question ignores reality. Kansas is an open carry state, the same way they do now. For those who don't know, open carry states generally do not require permits.

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 6:05:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldncreepy quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery So tell the NRA to stop blocking guns it doesn't happen to like because they threaten their manufacturer's cartel. A short explanation of why: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armatix_iP1 Marketing this entry would make the sale of all other handguns illegal in the state of New Jersey under current law. I know why. Which is why opposing the law is understandable, while opposing guns they don't like is anti-market.

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 6:16:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: oldncreepy quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery So tell the NRA to stop blocking guns it doesn't happen to like because they threaten their manufacturer's cartel. A short explanation of why: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armatix_iP1 Marketing this entry would make the sale of all other handguns illegal in the state of New Jersey under current law. I know why. Which is why opposing the law is understandable, while opposing guns they don't like is anti-market. You really can't understand that the law is the reason for the opposition can you?

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 6:25:25 PM)
I do understand. And I disagree. Fight the law. But fighting the gun is clearly anti-market. And not very 2nd Amendment either. Let people buy guns they want--and if they don't, the market will take care of it. But if they do, this is simply anti-capitalism to protect a vested market. Here...have more kool-aid.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 6:58:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether Is it really a burden to carry a small and simple little note in the wallet? That people stated once that credit and debit cards would remove the need to carry money in the wallet. Yet, people have paper dollars right next to their credit and debit cards. So I ask in all honesty what the actual burden is? Apparently, it's a burden to "carry a small and simple little note in the wallet" because we can't have people do that to vote...

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 7:00:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I do understand. And I disagree. Fight the law. But fighting the gun is clearly anti-market. And not very 2nd Amendment either. Let people buy guns they want--and if they don't, the market will take care of it. But if they do, this is simply anti-capitalism to protect a vested market. Here...have more kool-aid. That is where you are wrong, people won't be able to buy the guns they want. Please tell me how, if one smart gun is available, you can buy anything else in NJ or CA and a couple of other states with those others banned in those states. The smart gun requirement is anti choice and anti 2nd no matter how many times you say otherwise. The gun that was going to go on sale was a bulky .22 that cost $1200. And it would have driven every other handgun off the market, not because people would have preferred it but because the law would have banned them. They can't put out the smart gun and let the market decide until it is the market and not politicians who decide.

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 7:33:48 PM)
Yet again . . . That's why I get opposing LAW. Please read that part. I've said that several times, and you continue to ignore it. But I also oppose banning the gun -- that's equally anti-market. Not a smart gun requirement, but a smart gun option. That's how free markets -- and a free people -- work. It's also where the NRA tips its hand as an industry group, not a consumer group.

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 7:48:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yet again . . . That's why I get opposing LAW. Please read that part. I've said that several times, and you continue to ignore it. But I also oppose banning the gun -- that's equally anti-market. Not a smart gun requirement, but a smart gun option. That's how free markets -- and a free people -- work. It's also where the NRA tips its hand as an industry group, not a consumer group. I have no problem with the option, but I can't support it as long as it going on the market, particularly while just filling one minor niche, constitutes banning those things it should compete with in the marketplace. You can't have the open competition while these laws are in place. It sounds good to say "I oppose those laws but put something new in the market place to compete" but you know that it won't be competing it will be take it or leave it and the market will have no say. You have to be able to comprehend that claiming that when the other guns are banned, which they are under these laws there is no competing. I said the same thing in the 80's when they were talking about making the car companies go over to electric cars. If the product is forced on people they have no motivation to improve, talk about a cartel. The gun banning part is more anti market than anything the NRA could ever do.

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 7:51:07 PM)
I agree with you. Except with your last sentence. It's exactly what the NRA is doing.

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 7:57:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I agree with you. Except with your last sentence. It's exactly what the NRA is doing. Do you realize that with these laws in place a company would be committing suicide by releasing one smart gun before they had a complete line that corresponds to their current line. When the politicians get out of it the opposition will go away. Claiming that not wanting to commit suicide is anti market is do deny reality.

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 8:01:42 PM)
Of course I get that. The NRA is a de facto industry group, and this is an industry decision. It protects manufacturers--not consumers. Yet again, sigh, yes, the law is anti-market, and a problem, and needs to go.

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 8:06:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Of course I get that. The NRA is a de facto industry group, and this is an industry decision. It protects manufacturers--not consumers. Yet again, sigh, yes, the law is anti-market, and a problem, and needs to go. You honestly think that the consumers would be best served by functioning under these laws? You have to be kidding! Simple solution. The manufacturers tell the politicians that they will get smart guns once the laws are repealed. They put the onus on the politicians. There are huge profits to be made, once these laws go away. If they don't go first, they not only will not go away but they will spread to other states like NY

Musicmystery -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 8:08:45 PM)
Exactly the thinking of an industry group, vs. a consumer group. Simple, yes. Free market, no. Individual manufacturers in a free society get to decide what/when they make.

BamaD -> RE: Kanasas to make it easier to have concealable weapons (1/25/2015 8:11:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: joether Is it really a burden to carry a small and simple little note in the wallet? That people stated once that credit and debit cards would remove the need to carry money in the wallet. Yet, people have paper dollars right next to their credit and debit cards. So I ask in all honesty what the actual burden is? Apparently, it's a burden to "carry a small and simple little note in the wallet" because we can't have people do that to vote... Did I miss the part where states can no longer pass the laws they want unless it is in line with the Peoples Republic of MA? You must have missed that too, I guess his wisdom has told him that that too is obsolete.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625