12-21-2014, 10:36 AM
(12-21-2014, 10:03 AM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: GOOOOOOOOOOD MORNING MOCK. I hope everyone is feeling as chipper as I am this morning !
I think I am seeing part of the issue here. The pro gun side asks what the anti side calls, the same old moldy questions because we keep getting the same old hum drum answers. I feel this is a question about deaths and when it is OK to cause one.
No a auto is not intended as a killing tool and no the rules are not the same for them as they are for firearms, but the fact still remains that they cause more deaths every year than a firearm ever thought of. So why are we not looking harder at auto safety than we are firearm safety?
I guess where the big difference between the sides is that the pro gun side is looking at the number of deaths every year caused by any given object and the anti side is looking at the cause of death and overlooking the number.
I hope I am not being sleep deprived here and that makes sense.
No, I think the problem (your word, I don't really see a problem -- only a discussion/debate) is that you see this as "pro" gun vs. "anti" gun. That's what you posted above and it's clear in all of your posts on the subject.
I, on the other hand, am "pro" people. I want people to be able to do whatever the hell they want (with guns or anything else), so long as they are not harming or posing harm/death to other people.
So, I'm not "anti" or "pro" gun. I don't think you're able to process that reality as you always seem to take the "you're with me or against me!" stance if someone is open-minded on the subject of gun control and then try to tell them where they stand. You're wrong nearly every time you do that with me, F.U. But, you're certainly free to keep doing it and keep being wrong.
Your "pro" gun agenda and mentality, IMO, is what prompts you to respond to any original discussion with the same oft-repeated rhetoric and deflection.
But, you're a nice enough guy and friendly too. So, on with the show...
