Once more, gun control opponents...

[Mr. Reactionary]

Well, I'll never get back the time I wasted reading 5 pages of this moronic, blood-dancing crap.
Allow me to explain this issue in nice, short sentences.

Humans have an inherent right to self-defense.
Americans have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
You must amend the Constitution to change that.
There are 300 Million guns in private hands.
You will never find them all.
You will never take them all.
If you try, many otherwise peaceful gun owners will shoot back and you will lose.
Making it a bit more inconvenient to legally obtain guns will not reduce violent crime.
As long as the military has guns, the people should have guns.
As long as the Police have guns, the people should have guns.
As long as criminals have guns, the people should have guns.
Anyone who would prevent a woman from shooting an attempted rapist is evil.
Anyone who would prevent a mother from shooting a criminal attacking her child is evil.
Anyone who would ban guns even though there is no right to police protection is evil.
Blaming the already illegal crimes of murder, rape, and robbery on a lack of gun control is stupid.
Gun control is not about preventing violence, as it may only be enforced by violence.
And anyone who says all gunowners are bad is a moron.

Seriously, is there literally ANY issue that lefties won't play the "Childrenz will DIE!" card on to try and overcome their lack of support. I mean, Gun Control, Global Warming, Medicaid Expansion, Abortion restrictions, taxation, ... Midnight Basketball for Christ's sake. OMG think of Teh Childrenz! Agree with muh position or teh childrenz will DIE in teh streets. Never mind the long-term drop in gun crime. How about we think of the rights of individuals? If a single mother has no gun when a rapist serial killer breaks into her house, odds are children will die as well. You don't get to monopolize that argument. Until you somehow eliminate violence generally, gun control is pointless.

[Mr. Reactionary]

As I have made clear, I support allowing people (how benevolent of you) to own guns for home defense and for hunting and for collecting and for whatever other reasons they want be free from warrantless searches, I just want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill, and people who go and shoot up churches or shoot up schools or malls stop terrorists. I can't believe you libertarians are so willing to stick to rigid ideology when people are dying. For God's sake, have a heart. And you know what? Children will die. I'd love for you to go tell all of the parents of the little children who were cut down in Newtown widows of 9/11 first-responders how you believe that America should have zero gun control PATRIOT Act whatsoever (which clearly seems to be your stance).

Anyway, I'm not going to debate this with you. Free Bird was reasonable. He is willing to discuss it. You are I am not. You are I am close-minded and will stick to your my rigid, anti-government individual rights, anarchistic statist ideology even when people are being cut down in churches 9/11!!!!!!

[Mr. Reactionary]

As I have made clear, I support allowing people to own guns for home defense and for hunting and for collecting and for whatever other reasons they want,

A repeal (or MAJOR change) to the second amendment is required to cease and reverse this dangerous proliferation.

Ban all guns. Just like the rest of the world.

However, I wouldn't allow just anyone to own a gun for self-defense.  You should either have to be a law enforcement officer or have a compelling reason and pass a series of tests and background checks.

[Mr. Reactionary]

This was a weird post.

You accuse me of being overly statist when you advocate the PATRIOT Act? Seriously?

Lolz ... I was being tongue in cheek which is why I edited YOUR quote as opposed to typing out my own. I was attempting to point out that the argument you made is the exact same spiel Rudy Giuliani and other Republicans used to justify violating the 4th Amendment. The only difference here is that you think muh gunz is different.

As an aside I don't want you to think Im harboring ill feelings towards you ... but I do get irked when people pretend that rights are merely an allowance of the government that can be ignored at will just because blood dancers appear to love to exploit dead children for political capital. The 2nd Amendment is every bit as much of the Bill of Rights as the 4th.

[Mr. Reactionary]

This was a weird post.

You accuse me of being overly statist when you advocate the PATRIOT Act? Seriously?

Lolz ... I was being tongue in cheek which is why I edited YOUR quote as opposed to typing out my own. I was attempting to point out that the argument you made is the exact same spiel Rudy Giuliani and other Republicans used to justify violating the 4th Amendment.

Lol, sorry. It's hard to discern tone through the computer. You can't see the expression on someone's face to make it clear they're not being serious.

The only difference here is that you think muh gunz is different.

As an aside I don't want you to think Im harboring ill feelings towards you ... but I do get irked when people pretend that rights are merely an allowance of the government that can be ignored at will just because blood dancers appear to love to exploit dead children for political capital. The 2nd Amendment is every bit as much of the Bill of Rights as the 4th.

Of course, but I think gun ownership should be a privilege reserved for those who are responsible. Guns are very powerful tools and they should be used with great caution. I think we need to have reasonable regulations to prevent the wrong kind of people from getting a gun. I support the 2nd Amendment just as much as the next guy, but when shootings like this continue to occur, it becomes clear we need to act.

And BTW I know you don't harbor ill feelings, but I get irked when people seem to not want to take action on this.

Good to know. Yeah, at this point I'd say depriving someone of their 2nd Amendment liberty at the conclusion of due process like say a felony trial or formal determination of mental incompetence by a judge with subsequent opportunities for reversal is consistent with the bill of rights, but I'd say most other proposals aren't (nor are they effective) absent an amendment. Ditto for the other first 8 Amendments.

[Mr. Reactionary]

How dare you cowardly exercise your 1st Amendment rights on the internet under a username. A real hyper-masculine guy would walk around in public shouting their viewpoints while wearing a shirt with their full name, address, and list of fears on it.

For real though, how someone chooses to exercise their lawful rights is their business. Open Carry or Concealed. Different situations call for different tactics.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I know, I know, they all live in the basement of mommy, polishing their guns, smoking weed and some insulting third thing.

You forgot to mention Somalia. Apparently the only choices are to always increase the power and scope of government or else you are an advocate for Somalia.