Skip to content

The UCSB shooters parents blame 2nd amendment.

Political Discussion
139 16 3.0k
  • You anti-gunners don't make any sense - going after law abiding citizens who have guns,

    "because criminals and crazy people commit crimes"....

    Didn't this guy run people over with his Beemer too, or at least try ? Maybe we should ban cars for all the law abiding drivers too

  • Oh god... The "maybe we should ban cars" argument for the millionth time....

  • Mental health, misogyny, spoiled/entitlement,gender placement in society. These are the issues. not the gun/knife

  • You anti-gunners don't make any sense - going after law abiding citizens who have guns,

    "because criminals and crazy people commit crimes"....

    Didn't this guy run people over with his Beemer too, or at least try ? Maybe we should ban cars for all the law abiding drivers too

    @browns149 said:

    You anti-gunners don't make any sense - going after law abiding citizens who have guns,

    "because criminals and crazy people commit crimes"....

    Didn't this guy run people over with his Beemer too, or at least try ? Maybe we should ban cars for all the law abiding drivers too

    The cars=guns argument is a very popular deflection around here no matter how ridiculous it is. Congratulations. Now you=bunker

  • Mental health, misogyny, spoiled/entitlement,gender placement in society. These are the issues. not the gun/knife

    @legacy-fan said:

    Mental health, misogyny, spoiled/entitlement,gender placement in society. These are the issues. not the gun/knife

    And like I said before are you willing to pay more taxes for a mental health overhaul? You know that would mean changing the standard for gun ownership don't you?

  • You guys call anyone that advocates a better standard for gun ownership "anti gunners" because that makes us more threatening to you and therefore an enemy. Perhaps an enemy to be gunned down, no? Since all we want is to take all your guns and rights away after all. Murica.

  • You guys call anyone that advocates a better standard for gun ownership "anti gunners" because that makes us more threatening to you and therefore an enemy. Perhaps an enemy to be gunned down, no? Since all we want is to take all your guns and rights away after all. Murica.

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    Perhaps an enemy to be gunned down, no? Since all we want is to take all your guns and rights away after all. Murica.

    internet_troll.png

  • Can we at least edit the title of this thread? You know... so its actually true?

  • Can we at least edit the title of this thread? You know... so its actually true?

    @mld-woody said:

    Can we at least edit the title of this thread? You know... so its actually true?

    No. I prefer my threads murky and non-informative.

  • @the-cysko-kid said:

    Perhaps an enemy to be gunned down, no? Since all we want is to take all your guns and rights away after all. Murica.

    internet_troll.png

    @logicisforsquares said:

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    Perhaps an enemy to be gunned down, no? Since all we want is to take all your guns and rights away after all. Murica.

    internet_troll.png

    So why else call us "anti gunners". Why make it us vs them? That's a sure way to never reach a compromise.

  • @logicisforsquares said:

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    Perhaps an enemy to be gunned down, no? Since all we want is to take all your guns and rights away after all. Murica.

    internet_troll.png

    So why else call us "anti gunners". Why make it us vs them? That's a sure way to never reach a compromise.

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    So why else call us "anti gunners". Why make it us vs them? That's a sure way to never reach a compromise.

    Implying that one side is making it an us vs. them and implying that they would want to gun down the other is just straight up trolling.

    As for the anti gunner label, I find it unproductive to a discussion. Not nearly as unproductive as calling gun owners weak and pathetic, but pretty unproductive.

  • No I'm just playing up my role as an "anti gunner". by the way please inform me where changing the standard for gun ownership is "anti" gun. You must be a square because logic is not making an appearance

  • No I'm just playing up my role as an "anti gunner". by the way please inform me where changing the standard for gun ownership is "anti" gun. You must be a square because logic is not making an appearance

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    No I'm just playing up my role as an "anti gunner". by the way please inform me where changing the standard for gun ownership is "anti" gun. You must be a square because logic is not making an appearance

    Who are you arguing with? I never said anything about "anti-gun". Confusing your targets, Cal?

  • Dude if guys like legacy want to go on the attack rather than stick to actual points they're going to find I have no problem counter attacking.

  • Dude if guys like legacy want to go on the attack rather than stick to actual points they're going to find I have no problem counter attacking.

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    Dude if guys like legacy want to go on the attack rather than stick to actual points they're going to find I have no problem counter attacking.

    When has anyone stuck to the points in any debate on this forum?

  • As for trolling we've been having this go round for thousands of posts before you arrived. I've come to the conclusion long ago that trying to discuss here is utterly pointless. One does not simply "discuss" an issue on the browns board. You attack or you defend but you do not discuss.

  • @the-cysko-kid said:

    Dude if guys like legacy want to go on the attack rather than stick to actual points they're going to find I have no problem counter attacking.

    When has anyone stuck to the points in any debate on this forum?

    @logicisforsquares said:

    When has anyone stuck to the points in any debate on this forum?

    Basically this is correct.

  • As for trolling we've been having this go round for thousands of posts before you arrived. I've come to the conclusion long ago that trying to discuss here is utterly pointless. One does not simply "discuss" an issue on the browns board. You attack or you defend but you do not discuss.

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    As for trolling we've been having this go round for thousands of posts before you arrived. I've come to the conclusion long ago that trying to discuss here is utterly pointless. One does not simply "discuss" an issue on the browns board. You attack or you defend but you do not discuss.

    That is the internet.

  • But for real when pointing the finger at mental health as legacy is doing you have to realize reforming mental health would inevitably change the standard of legal gun ownership. So why the backlash to suggesting a change in the standard of gun ownership?

  • Unless you don't think there is a problem and then you are probably mentally ill equipped to be trusted with a gun, since you'd be living in a fantasy world.