Welcome to DU!
    The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
    Join the community:
    Create a free account
    Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
    Become a Star Member
    Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
    All Forums
        Issue Forums
        Culture Forums
        Alliance Forums
        Region Forums
        Support Forums
        Help & Search
    
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: What did the Founders mean... [View all]gejohnston
(17,502 posts)75. you are the one making cheap shots logical fallacies
        Chicago and pro gun Houston, in order to show that Houston with it's larger total crime rate was being ignored by gun nuts while they gleefully enjoyed attacking gun control Chicago, complaining about the smell in Chicago while ignoring the STINK in their own backyard. In a equable comparison you don't compare smaller cities with Chicago. 
  Since gangs don't go to gun stores or gun shows, the argument is irrelevant.  I never said Chicago's problem had anything to do with gun control, therefore I am not card stacking.  I said it had more to do with wealth inequality, like everywhere else.  Chicago might be unique because local politicians have mutually beneficial relationships with the gangs, even as far as city council members protecting them from the police.  Chicago gets its rap because don't care about the problem and call for gun control to placate the honest citizens living in the gang infested areas.  
To show how stupid your argument is, Gary in pro gun Indiana has or has had over twice the murder rate as Chicago. Doesn't that make pro gun policy asinine by your above argument? Now THAT would be card stacking.
 It would be card stacking ONLY IF I were making the argument that gun laws had anything to do with it.  Since I agree with the plurality of criminologists that gun laws are irrelevant and that there is no correlation,  I noticed that you entirely ignore any argument about the real reasons, instead, you accuse me of the fictional "breaking lamp defense" and taking cheap shots.  
You have such little proper debate skills; you substitute disassembling OF the truth, for a valid rendering of what IS true. 
Take your cheap shots, your ignorance of valid argumentation, and bias against what your own democrat party supports overwhelmingly, and go away.
 You are projecting.  I'm not making cheap shots, I am accurately pointing out the flaws in your argument.  Facts and truth are not always the same thing.  If anyone disassembles, it is you when you go off tangents that have nothing to do with the issue.  Most of your "arguments" are not even arguments.  Saying it goes against the DNC platform is not a valid argument for it being a good policy, it is simply an argument to go along if I were partisan enough to blindly put party over principle and the party thinks for me.  In case you haven't noticed, that isn't me.
Take your cheap shots, your ignorance of valid argumentation, and bias against what your own democrat party supports overwhelmingly, and go away.
BTW, it is "Democratic party", not "democrat" party. That is the Republican term. Might want to double check your voting registration.
Actually, conventional wisdom is usually dead wrong
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-25/opinion/sns-201204251900--tms--ahuffcoltq--m-a20120425apr25_1_conventional-wisdom-introverts-extroverts
https://www.amazon.com/Untruth-Conventional-Wisdom-Almost-Always/dp/0812991648
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventional_wisdom
Relying on conventional wisdom is also a logical fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
  Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
						
							102 replies
							
								 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
                     = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
        
        So the French Navy was just there for show? Funny, I could've sworn it was them who ensured victory.
        malchickiwick
        Jun 2017
        #4
      
        
        US history is rife with examples of our leaders' mistakes and even crimes
        discntnt_irny_srcsm
        Jun 2017
        #10
      
        
        This reply doesn't say anything about your thoughts on the subject...
        discntnt_irny_srcsm
        Jun 2017
        #18
      
        
        Did you also note that 'everyone' else who isn't in the NG, is also a member of the militia?
        jmg257
        Jun 2017
        #28
      
        
        Meh- a prolix, badly formatted argumentum ad populum *and* sheer Colonism:
        friendly_iconoclast
        Aug 2017
        #93
      
        
        The government "...derives its just powers from the consent of the governed..." n/t
        discntnt_irny_srcsm
        Jun 2017
        #11
      
        
        History is filled with examples of people oppressed by Leaders who abuse their power
        MedusaX
        Jun 2017
        #7
      
        
        I can't say it better than most of the posters above have already said, but will add
        Alea
        Jun 2017
        #8
      
        
        Generally, Hamilton is good on this, yet his notion of a select militia didn't come about for
        jmg257
        Jun 2017
        #9
      
        
        Not really arguing anything, Jim - pointing out it is quite easy to know what the founders meant
        jmg257
        Jul 2017
        #40
      
        
        You have the right to express your opinion using any method available before 1792
        friendly_iconoclast
        Jul 2017
        #41
      
        
        If that's true, then why aren't single shot firearms recommended over "self loading" models...
        Marengo
        Jul 2017
        #45
      
        
        "...(S)omething we do not need in modern society" Would that be the royal 'we', or...
        friendly_iconoclast
        Jul 2017
        #46
      
        
        A) GC&RKBA is not an 'amen chorus', and B) none of that bears upon what I posted
        friendly_iconoclast
        Jul 2017
        #58
      
        
        Your opinion is welcome, however it is nonsensical and there is no obligation for anyone to accept..
        Marengo
        Jul 2017
        #55
      
        
        "Revolvers are for people who display poor marksmanship or who intend to kill multiple times."
        friendly_iconoclast
        Jul 2017
        #47
      
        
        Should the government prevent the ownership of word processing software? It postdates 1793...
        Marengo
        Jul 2017
        #57
      
        
        So, you're ok with me having a 20 shot semi-auto .68 caliber rifle then?
        AtheistCrusader
        Aug 2017
        #95
      
        
        Perfect! And this is yet another point that restriction supporters will never grasp.
        pablo_marmol
        Aug 2017
        #90
      
  