One of my favorite discredited gun control arguments

If its false, then please provide something to prove your position. I provided what I found, so maybe you should show what you found so we can compare.

So far everyone shrieks "I DON'T BELIEVE IT", which not much of an argument.

The points I mentioned are about US.

I do not write history books, and no one said anything about serial numbers.

 

Why indeed. Some people live in houses like the one in the pic, and half a mile away people shoot heroin on the side walks. The answer is same as anywhere in US, - it is what it is. We have luxury and we have misery. Its no just Ft Lauderdale, Miami or Daytona. Mar A Lago, where Trump lives, houses look much like the one below, is next door to some very dangerous neighborhoods. The whole country is like this. You live under a rock?

 

Speech about certain topic HAS been criminalized and corporations are in process of editing their employee training materials to make sure the wording does not violate the State laws. Training materials cannot be such that it makes people "uncomfortable". Some corporations will probably remove training material altogether rather than risk lawsuits. This is not freedom.

You should not accuse people of lying. Its nasty, especially when you know you bear false witness.

No one said ALL speech has been criminalized, but now that you mention, the Florida government did try to pass a law which would have made it easier for politicians to sue people who criticize them. You don't know about these things because you have buried your head in the sand.


'Gift to the Ruling Class': Florida Bill Would Make It Easier for Officials Like DeSantis to Sue Critics'
https://www.commondreams.org/news/florida-bill-desantis-sue-critics

 

You really think it was up to a popular vote?

 

So, poor people are poor because rich people are rich. As if, what, wealth is fixed, and if I have more, someone else has less? My gold coins are worth more now that when I bought them, whose wealth did I steal, Mr. Marx?

Are you sure it doesn't have anything to do with making dumb choices, and having an entitlement attitude, feeling like the world owes them something merely because someone gave them birth once upon a time? Or perhaps it's just a total lack of a work ethic, and even doing simple stuff like showing up when you said you would for... whatever, really.

Most poor people are poor for a reason, and those reasons are generally, but not always self-inflicted. As for your sidewalk heroin users, well, who is the one putting the heroin in their arms? I'm a 'my body, my choice' kind of guy, far be it from me to restrict people from putting whatever they want into their veins, but I'm also a work hard, play hard kind of guy. And I mean that literally. There is a time for play, and a time for taking care of business, whatever that may be. And as they say, just showing up is half the battle.

 

Your words, not mine. I didn't say anything of the sort.

Your words, not mine......again.

In many cases its due to poor choices and in some other cases its due to other issues. Not sure what entitlement attitude has to do with it.

I said "it is what it is" but you argue as if I said something else. Its weird.

IMO its just the nature of the beast in US. Some people are rich, some are poor, and most are somewhere in the middle. Its really doesn't have anything to do with the topic.

 

Well, let's retrace our steps, shall we? We were talking about crime in Florida, when you informed me that where you lived, the crime rate is actually quite high. You played coy games back and forth until we figured out we were talking about Ft. Lauderdale, and I said I did not know why it had so much crime and the Tampa Bay area does not. You then showed a picture of some fantastic homes, and boats that probably cost more than the homes, and contrasted that (with the apparently mandatory dig at Trump) with poor druggies putting drugs into their veins just a few blocks away from such fantastic wealth, but with no real explanation.

So, I made the logical conclusion that I made, to which you are now disavowing.

So, we are once again at the point where I don't have the first foggiest idea what you are talking about, or what point you are trying to make, and that includes that article you posted about Desantis and suing people for libel, and yadda yadda. I get that he is Public Enemy No. Two to y'all, because he, like Trump, is seen as someone who will put an end to this green new nonsense, and with worrying about who is using the wrong word to reference whoever's genitals it is they happen to be talking to or about, as if it was the most important thing everywhere. Divide and conquer is the name of the game, no?

In the meantime, you keep arguing while at the same time disavowing the idea that it's good for teachers to be planning lessons for 5-year-olds about adult sexual subjects they are not even interested in, or capable of understanding, and that it's wise to be counsel teenagers (if even that) to lop off their dicks before they even figure out what they are for to begin with! In the meantime, you are a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, signifying nothing.

If you would like to have an adult conversation without playing The Riddler, get back to me, otherwise, charlie mike.

 

The answer to your question was "it is the nature of the beast", but you came up with your version and tried to insert it in my mouth. Its dishonest. There was also no dig at your beloved political leader, I simple mentioned were he lives. Why does that offend you?

Your words are your words, and not for me to own or disavow. You own them.

You never do. You asked a question, and I answered it, and you tried to twist it into some weird theory and then tries to insert it in my mouth.

Did that offend you? He does what he does, and you are a sworn defender of big government and authoritarianism. You keep proving it.

He is the one worrying about it. As a matter of fact its pretty much all he worries about. That and teen age girls periods. Me, I don't give a rats as what people want to call themselves. Why do you care? Why do you need laws to control what people say or call themselves. But of course you want that. You need the government involved in everything.

No clue what, or why, you are telling be this, but you can lop off your dick right now for all I care. Its none of my business, so I simply do not care what you do with it.

Its better if you go insert your words in someone else's mouth.

 

He is not my hero. I didn't vote for him the first time, was in a coma the second, and he is number 3 on my list of those I least want to win the 2024 Presidential election. #1 is Kamala Harris, #2 is Joe Biden, and Don slides in as my number three least desired. I did think he did well with the tax cuts for yes, me, good old middle class, decent on the southern border, and great with his SCOTUS picks, but I don't see anyone getting even one pick in the next 6 years, much less 3, so that's not a concern. They also are textualists, which is something I've wanted for decades now, and they apparently know how to read and know what 'shall not be infringed' means.

And the dig at him was out of place and off topic considering what we were discussing, as it was not his neighborhood, nor was he in any way related to your point, whatever that is. But it is quite typical for people suffering from TDS to bring him up at every opportunity, even when unrelated.

That's not exactly accurate, now, is it. I made a statement about crime not being that bad in Florida, to which you disagreed. When you finally spit out that it was Ft. Lauderdale you were talking about, I explained that I did not know the answer to your question. Then, you seemed to make a cryptic attempt to answer your own question by pointing out the disparity between the extremely rich water dwellers, and the junkies a few blocks away.

I misinterpreted what you meant, but when you went back to essentially that you didn't know either (which is essentially what 'that's just how things are' is), I was and still am confused as to why you bothered posting it in the first place, if that is your conclusion. We have houses like that here, maybe not quite that extravagant, especially on the boat side, except for perhaps the Tom Bradys and such who live around, but that's steep even by Tampa rich standards. But... so, what?

You need to read, or pay attention to what your reading in more of my posts. I'm a closet anarchist, who begrudgingly thinks that homo sapiens is not mature enough to live sans some form of government, but to quote TJeff, that which governs least governs best. I have repeatedly called for the gutting of the Federal Government, and the complete destruction of entire departments, especially those not specifically authorized in The Constitution. I want the end of gun regulation for law abiding citizens, including allowing everyone who is not a prohibited person to carry pretty much anywhere a police officer is allowed to, the end of the war on drugs, allowing seed or lab to consumer to be handled by legal firms, thus insuring quality and quantity standardization, so nobody who takes the same pills I take on a daily basis to die because it was really fentanyl. I don't worry about that happening to the ones I get from the pharmacy.

I could continue, but if you don't know this by now, you probably aren't reading very deep into my prior posting history, as it's been a consistent message that I've preached since before I was even aware this forum existed.

Why do I care? Well, because schools are not only concealing information regarding their childs alleged gender identity issues from their parents, they are conspiring to do so with their administration and superiors. I care because the NHL is being bullied into wearing rainbow jerseys, and anyone who doesn't want to is outright threatened. Their reasons vary, some for religious reasons, but not being a person who even likes religion, my attitude about that is that it's dumb, but it's your life. But more importantly, it has come to my attention that since so many NHL players are Russian, and Russia has such backwards laws when it comes to the LGBTABDEDFRGGER+ crowd, they may be in jeopardy of imprisonment or worse if/when they go back to their homes. Personally, if I managed to escape that hellhole, I would never look back, but it's not my place to tell them to do as I would do, and I think that such concerns outweigh the bullying tactics of "Wear these jerseys, OR ELSE!!!!". Frankly, I don't know why it ever came up in the first place, I never wore a jersey with any sort of any political statement during my years of organized sports, and see no reason for anyone to start now.

But, hey, maybe it's OK for leagues to be bullied into complying with such ridiculous demands, eh?

I'm a friend of that crowd, though I am not at all in favor of minors taking drugs or having gender bending surgery, then again, I thought in most places minors couldn't even get tattoos. I also have no issues with tattoos, I have two myself, and have been thinking about getting another, if I can ever find something that fits my personality type tightly, but I think there are large differences in between what minors and adults are allowed to do.

Which wasn't all that controversial until about the last 6-9 months. I don't know who sent out the memo that children were now in charge, or precisely when, because I never got it.

Ditto, when it comes to yours. When it comes to your minor children, then I have to draw a line, and that is where I draw it. As I said above, that is where everyone drew it until just very recently. That is a one way street, and I don't think minors (or anyone below 25, really) are mature enough to make such a final and permanent decision. But, once you hit 18 and 1 day, chop away. At that point you are a full adult, except for booze and guns, but that's a different thing.

 

We were discussing neighborhoods, and I mentioned his neighborhood, which is luxurious is not far from bad neighborhoods, which is typical in Florida. You took it as a dog because you are hyper sensitive on his beheld, because you fear he is being criticized even when he is not. Its classic apologist behavior.

. Yes, it was 100% accurate I

I didn't ask you anything. You asked me, and I answered, and you twisted my answer into something totally different.

I didn't go back, it was the only answer I gave. I said its the nature of the beast. Your answer was that you didn't know, and unlike you, I did not twist that into something else.

That is what you claim, but its hard to believe, since you always pine for authoritarian government getting involved in anything.

And your solution to that "horror" is more government. BTW, no one wore those jerseys during games, only during warm-ups, and quite a few players declined even that, and no one was threatened. No one also bullied NHL into it, they came up with the idea, like they came up with a dozen other "issue nights". You have been played into getting government involved into regulating what people say and what they wear. See what I mean?

So you were told, but many did not wear them, and nothing happened.

Don't worry, You can/will vote for a government which will ban such jerseys among many other politicly incorrect things.

 

Please. I'm just sick and tired of hearing 'Trump, Trump, Trump' in virtually every thread I read here (and elsewhere), many of which have less than nothing to do with him. I could start a thread about the NFL draft, and someone, perhaps even you, might come along and find an excuse to bring him into the conversation, or may do so even without even an excuse because TDS is real, and people give that man way too much rent-free time in their noggins. I barely think about the guy, and when I do, it's hoping he doesn't win the '24 GOP primary, because if you guys put up Biden again (and what choice do you have, really?), I may have to vote for him as the lesser of two evils.

Which is pretty normal for almost every presidential election since I've been of age to vote.

As far as whatever it is that your issues are in southeast Florida, those are your issues, and if you can't even tell me why it's happening, don't ask me to figure it out for you. It is not like that here, or where any of my family live, which ranges from Ocala to Coral Gables, and my area was just named by Time Magazine as one of the top places IN THE WORLD to visit and live in. Which will only serve to jack the price on the houses I need to sell even more, so we can get a little manufactured home out in the woods somewhere, and maybe stop (or at least reduce) the rent we have to pay to keep what we own, and the payments to educate complete strangers offspring.

 

I may be guilty of many things but I don't believe that I have shrieked disbelief at anything during our exchange.

I still maintain that the author(s) of the article you cite is at least being dishonest if not lying as a reflection of his/her anti 2A bias.

Re:

The author's list makes claims that are easily refuted, outright lies.

Sometimes a lie is so outrageous that common sense is all that is needed to refute it.
For example:
Re:

This assertion is an outright lie. After America achieved its Independence, there were absolutely no registration schemes as they are known today.

I had a flintlock pistol of the era made by "Parks and Lawton" and there is not a serial number to be found on the piece.
I currently have a percussion cap, 1861 "Tower" musket and there is no serial number anywhere on this firearm either.

Common sense tells us that it is impossible to register firearms with no serial numbers just as there is absolutely no central record of firearms owned by citizens or their serial numbers.

Therefore the anti 2A author(s) who claim that: "1. Guns at that time were registered." is either lying or so ignorant as too be useless as a source.

The author's second claim:

is another slickly worded lie. Upon reading the "small print", we find that the author really means that the carrying of firearms in the city of London was illegal.
London, by the way, is in England and it was precisely this sort of government tyranny that the American colonies opposed so strongly that they fought a war rejecting government disarmament schemes.

I don't have time to expose the other slickly worded lies but I still wonder wonder what your opinion is.

If the firearms of that earlier era did not have serial numbers, how could there have been any sort of registration scheme?

Why are there absolutely no records of an earlier American gun registration system?

Finally, if biased and dishonest pundits are proven to be liars, why believe anything they write?

To be clear, I am not accusing you of being dishonest. I am simply showing where and why the author(s) are being deliberately deceptive.

Thanks,

 

Then why do you keep repeating it? I simply mentioned where he lives and it made your head explode, and now you just can let go of it, and have to bring him up with every post.

Why the obsession? Why the hyper-sensitivity to mere mention of his name? If there is such thing as TDS, then your reaction is textbook example.

Oh no.....the BDS too. Seems like you suffer from multiple syndromes.

I never asked you. You asked me.

Coral Gables
"The chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime in Coral Gables is 1 in 42. Based on FBI crime data, Coral Gables is not one of the safest communities in America. Relative to Florida, Coral Gables has a crime rate that is higher than 73% of the state's cities and towns of all sizes."

Ocala
"With a crime rate of 36 per one thousand residents, Ocala has one of the highest crime rates in America compared to all communities of all sizes - from the smallest towns to the very largest cities."

 

I think what some think was registration was more likely that when men appeared for militia duty or drills they would record that each man meeting the muster had a suitable weapon -such as Joe Smith-1 Kentucky long rifle, caliber 45. or Dave Jones, one shotgun, 12 bore.

 

If its easy, then then why don't refute them? Screaming "I don't believe it". Or "common sense tells me its a lie" are not arguments. You are just burying your head deeper in the sand.

Maybe discussing these historical facts should be criminalized, because clearly they make people very uncomfortable.

Obviously not 'as they are today', but rather as things were during that time. I thought you were talking about common sense, but maybe I was mistaken. Law abiding citizens were expected to be.........law abiding, but you assume they were not because you suggest people would have refused to register. Maybe they simply didn't have anything against the idea of registering.

Maybe London too, but also in US.

Of course not. Its far easier to scream "IT'S A LIE....IT'S A LIE.....I DONT WANT TO BELIEVE IT".

Yes. See, if you want to run a well regulated militia, you'd at least want to know how many men you have, what kind of firepower you have and now much. So, you swear an oath, be accepted as an official member of the militia and register you firearm and your name. The problem with you guys is that you are so brainwashed into thinking ANY registry roe ANY reason is always EVIL. You'll never consider any other angle.

 

Likely.
This 'registration' was a function of signing up for service in the militia, unrelated to the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms.

 

It was related, because if you were not part of the militia (most people were), they you could not have a firearm. If you lived in rural areas, it was probably different because people needed firearms to hunt and defend against wildlife. Also, after the revolution they loosened the laws, but during the revolution it was conditional to swearing an oath. Of course the second amendment itself was not yet written during the revolution itself, but after it, but this is more about the founding fathers rather than the 2A.

 

Yours is a false statement, willfully made.

Yours is a false statement, willfully made.

 

It’s about power.

Have you ever competed with a gun, hunted?
I love blanket statements from ignorance. Says as much about you as your insults are trying to say about those you have never met.
Have you met everyone who has tricked out theicAR? What does tricked out mean? One of my daughters who competes Has a Pink AR. And she has an improved aftermarket trigger and sights suitable for the competition she does. So, is that ‘tricked’ out? Is she sad and pathetic?
Yep, clueless enough to be discounted as have nothing of value to contribute.

 

My complaint was that the source cited by @Pro_Line_FL made the claim that there was "gun registration" in early American history when most firearms did not even have serial numbers.

The record keeping you described is not the sort of centralized, national gun registration plan that most gun control advocates want to see in America.

A nationwide gun registration system is seen by many as a step toward a potential nationwide disarmament plan and is certainly something that the Founding Fathers would have rejected outright.

The bulk of my comment was made in response to the source: ""Five types of gun laws the Founding Fathers loved"*
which I thought was biased to the point of being misleading.

Did you read the article cited by @Pro_Line_FL and if so, what did you think?

Thanks,


*https://theconversation.com/five-types-of-gun-laws-the-founding-fathers-loved-85364

 

There is no need for them

No one suggested anything about present day. This is a discussion about history.

They had a registry back then, but maybe they would oppose the kind of registry you are talking about. I don't know but its irrelevant since we are not talking about current day

 

I don't believe that I have been "screaming" anything and I'm sure that I have not resorted to ALL CAPS at any point during our exchange and I am not at all uncomfortable discussing historical realities.

I have tried to keep our discussion at least civil and also don't recall being as hysterical as you are suggesting:
Re:

All I've done is read a source you cited and pointed out that it made claims that are misleading.
I only wrote about gun registration because it was number one on the author's list:

The author wrote: :

Some poorly informed people might conclude from that claim that all Americans in early America registered their firearms in some central registry even though most early American firearms had no serial number.

Don't you know the impossibility of maintaining an accurate gun registration system when the firearms have no serial number?

For the sake of brevity and simplicity, do you agree that the claim: "1. Guns at that time were registered." is misleading?

Re:

I don't think that just because someone else has a different opinion that they're necessarily "brainwashed"


Meanwhile, it's not from brainwashing that I learned that Springfield Armory didn't start stamping serial numbers on their firearms until 1865:

" Before 1865, serial numbers were not given to National Armory Weapons, even though production began at Springfield Armory in 1795 with the Model 1795 Flintlock Musket." (*)

AND:

"The Second Amendment was adopted along with the rest of the Bill of Rights in 1791.

“A firearm without a serial number in 1791 was certainly not considered dangerous or unusual compared to other firearms because serial numbers were not required or even commonly used at that time,” Goodwin wrote."


Thanks,


(*). "Firearm Serial Numbers"
https://www.nps.gov/spar/learn/historyculture/firearm-serial-numbers.htm


(**). "Judge blocks federal law banning possession of firearms with serial number removed"

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/serial-numbers-second-amendment/index.html

 

At some point its all about a popular vote in representative government. People voted for the person who told them "I want to do X" endorsing doing X.

 

How many times do we need to go over this? You don't need SNs

 

I have hunted, but I haven't in years. I love to go target shooting for fun. I also like to gunsmith. Some people mess around with 57 Chevies in the same way.
I support the 2d amendment.
None of my guns have ever hurt anyone. I raised them right.