Thread: Free men own guns, slaves dont.

Indeed we really need freedom to keep and bear arms for self protection.

Originally Posted by Felix (R)

A government that does not trust its citizens with guns, is a government that should not be trusted. Need I say more?

No. You've said plenty. It's embarrassing but you said it.

Originally Posted by Tribearer_Eko

as Machiavelli said "a ruler that disarms his people arms them with hate. a ruler that gives his people weapons makes those arms theirs"

Certainly not applicable to this country (USA). We have all the guns we could ever need.

Originally Posted by PatrickT

No. You've said plenty. It's embarrassing but you said it.

I suppose you deem this a sufficient rebuttle? Your argumentative discourse is equate to that of the annoying poster Danct, who seems to still be shouting little bits of nothing on this very thread.

Originally Posted by Felix (R)

I responded to your interpretation to the OP. If accusations are so horrible to you and you adhere to your own professed standards, you should apologize for this accusation that I am making this post up. Also, being apologies are so important to you, why not apologize for all this hostility. You speak of serious discussion as something of merit, but then seem incapable of conducting yourself as an adult. No offense intended, but I can only surmise that this is a result of a lack of attention from the opposite sex, or that you have been suppressing homosexuality for quite some time.
I have offered an apology and also submitted a reasonable argument in defense of the notion of actually attempting to abolish government. You mention me losing an argument, my goal here isnt really 'victory' as so many of you
Would label it. I have been wrong on these forums and admitted it when someone has been able to lay out there points effectively and not isolate quotes while ignoring other important points. And acting as a respectful adult always makes discourse much more enjoyable.

Is questioning an opponents sexuality for no apparent reason the way you display your respectful adulthood?
Your credibility went in the toilet with this post.

Originally Posted by thebrucebeat

Is questioning an opponents sexuality for no apparent reason the way you display your respectful adulthood?
Your credibility went in the toilet with this post.

It was a logical deduction good fellow. Your alleged, ''no apparent reason'' has been in the toilet.

Originally Posted by Felix (R)

I suppose you deem this a sufficient rebuttle? Your argumentative discourse is equate to that of the annoying poster Danct, who seems to still be shouting little bits of nothing on this very thread.

Still smarting from being shown your inconsistencies, eh? You made baseless accusations and you, as yet still have not substantiated and now appear to blame ME for your flawed posts. No, I'm posting logic and reason while you appear to be the only one "shouting" here.

Your choice.

Originally Posted by Felix (R)

It was a logical deduction good fellow. Your alleged, ''no apparent reason'' has been in the toilet.

No sir. It was childish ploy and revealed you as less than a credible adult. Your comment would be found very comfortably at recess.

Originally Posted by thebrucebeat

No sir. It was childish ploy and revealed you as less than a credible adult. Your comment would be found very comfortably at recess.

Incorrect. No ploy intended, it would have been suggested by many pyschologists.

Originally Posted by Danct

Still smarting from being shown your inconsistencies, eh? You made baseless accusations and you, as yet still have not substantiated and now appear to blame ME for your flawed posts. No, I'm posting logic and reason while you appear to be the only one "shouting" here.

Your choice.

What inconsistencies danct? Just saying things that sound good to you and possibly other malcontents do not count.