Should the Second Amendment apply to Biden voters? Should gun businesses refuse to serve people who voted Biden

[IndyDave1776]

Just a hypothetical question. If a illegal is caught, and he’s carrying a firearm, then the only crime he should be charged with, is illegal immigration? Idk, but I’d that how it works in states with no firearm possession restrictions?

If he surrenders peacefully, deport him. If he doesn't, shoot him.

 

[Route 45]

I chose to vote for harm reduction. For as much as Biden wants to violate--and there's a lot--I don't that he's intent on genocide. Trump was actively conducting genocide according to the U.N. definition.

 

[churchmouse]

Yes. Yes it really does.

 

[Twangbanger]

It definitely depends on perception. But I will say again that 2020 was the first time I've ever voted for a Democrat for a national office, so Biden isn't exactly my tribe.

I chose to vote for harm reduction. For as much as Biden wants to violate--and there's a lot--I don't that he's intent on genocide. Trump was actively conducting genocide according to the U.N. definition.

Well, I'm curious, I read the link and I'll pull the string. Which group(s) did Trump do these things to?

 

[Twangbanger]

Well, I'm curious, I read the link and I'll pull the string. Which group(s) did Trump do these things to?

Yeah, that's what I thought. He didn't do it to anybody.

I think the UN Genocide definition is also missing one component that every intelligent person realizes, which is that it's usually "involuntary," and doesn't result from situations people knowingly put themselves into.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Are all these threads being baited with "Hey look, a squirrel!" ?

 

[NukaDadd]

There's a reason why ballots are private. If someone asked who I voted for before I completed my transaction...not sure I'd want to do business with them TBH. They probably wouldn't like my answer, which wouldn't be "Biden" or "Trump"...

but "none of your GD business!".

 

[JettaKnight]

I found a new-to-me subreddit: Liberal Gun Owners.

Kind of interesting to see what's up on the other side of the aisle.

 

[Hardscrable]

I found a new-to-me subreddit: Liberal Gun Owners.

Kind of interesting to see what's up on the other side of the aisle.

Took at most 30 seconds until I wished I had my click back

 

[jamil]

Just a hypothetical question. If a illegal is caught, and he’s carrying a firearm, then the only crime he should be charged with, is illegal immigration? Idk, but I’d that how it works in states with no firearm possession restrictions?

If I were Grand Poohbah of the US (GPOTUS) yes. As a benevolent dictator, illegal aliens would be detained, firearms temporarily taken, reviewed to verify not stolen, and given back to them as they’re deported. If the country they’re being deported to does not allow firearm ownership, well, that’s not our problem.

Possession of firearms would not be illegal unless the right was stripped from the person by due process of course if it’s stolen.

 

[jamil]

I found a new-to-me subreddit: Liberal Gun Owners.

Kind of interesting to see what's up on the other side of the aisle.

What I see is that they also claim the right holds beliefs that they actually don’t hold.

 

[GIJEW]

I really can't name one historical event where guns prevented the govt. from silencing an American.

Battle of Athens TN after WW2. Corrupt county officials and their sheriff enforcer stole the ballot boxes when they thought they were going to lose. Returning vets decided that wasn't the democracy they were defending and it was on.

That said, who was it who said "The pen is mightier than the sword"?

 

[JettaKnight]

What I see is that they also claim the right holds beliefs that they actually don’t hold.

IKR?

It kind of fascinating - it's like a bizzaro world where they act the same, yet all have goatees (or maybe lack of goatees).
The rhetoric, arguments, absolutism, vilifying the "enemy", all the same in my eyes.



Like it or not, these folks are somewhat of strange bedfellows. They'll be the ones writing letters, "Dear Mr. President: I voted for you but totally disagree with your gun policy."

Battle of Athens TN after WW2. Corrupt county officials and their sheriff enforcer stole the ballot boxes when they thought they were going to lose. Returning vets decided that wasn't the democracy they were defending and it was on.

That said, who was it who said "The pen is mightier than the sword"?

I think someone beat you to that a a couple of weeks ago.

 

[Kutnupe14]

What I see is that they also claim the right holds beliefs that they actually don’t hold.

You don't say? Sounds like a bunch of INGO members, only in reverse.

 

[GIJEW]

I think someone beat you to that a a couple of weeks ago.

So I just reminded you then?

 

[jbombelli]

So I just reminded you then?

 

[jamil]

You don't say? Sounds like a bunch of INGO members, only in reverse.

Sure. But a major difference with INGO is that a few members seem to stoke that for all it's worth. If you disagree with what people say, state your case and discuss. But it's like a lot of it is disagreement for the sake of being disagreeable. That's not a conversation. That's bait.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Sure. But a major difference with INGO is that a few members seem to stoke that for all it's worth. If you disagree with what people say, state your case and discuss. But it's like a lot of it is disagreement for the sake of being disagreeable. That's not a conversation. That's bait.

I contend that any opinion outside of “groupthink” is bait. The only issue someone should have with any opinion, is if it isn’t an honest belief held by the person conveying the thought. Is there someone here who secretly believe is on “your side,” but pretends not to be? No? Well that simply means you dont want to hear something outside of your own beliefs.

 

[jamil]

I contend that any opinion outside of “groupthink” is bait. The only issue someone should have with any opinion, is if it isn’t an honest belief held by the person conveying the thought. Is there someone here who secretly believe is on “your side,” but pretends not to be? No? Well that simply means you dont want to hear something outside of your own beliefs.

I think the difference is intent. I disagree often enough with a fairly wide range of people on INGO. The purpose is to discuss ideas. But it looks to me like for some people, the point of disagreement seems to be more get other people to "other" them. Why else wouldn't you explain yourselves?

People who take my posts in a way I know I didn't mean it, I'll make the effort to set the record straight. But there are more than a couple of you guys who don't do that. Not meaning to call anyone out, so I won't mention names. But at least one person will say stuff that I may actually agree with, but it's said in a way that makes it sound like he's an "other". And then when he's called that, he'll double down on the "other" speak instead of clearing the record. Why? Why not be straight up?

And as for you, why don't you talk a lot more about what you think about all these things rather than trying to trap people in argumentation. I don't know about others, but it makes me not trust you.

 

[jamil]

I contend that any opinion outside of “groupthink” is bait. The only issue someone should have with any opinion, is if it isn’t an honest belief held by the person conveying the thought. Is there someone here who secretly believe is on “your side,” but pretends not to be? No? Well that simply means you dont want to hear something outside of your own beliefs.

Oh, and you don't have to do groupthink. That can be bait. But it can also be conversation. How you talk about it makes the distinction. If you don't agree with what someone says, saying what you think is wrong about it isn't bait. It's a discussion about ideas.