Hello Friend,

If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.

It will be the most efficient use of your time.

And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.

Thank you for visiting and have a great day!

Virginians stand tall today, I salute your courage

Warning!

Do not subscribe to The SoSuave Newsletter unless you are already a chick magnet!

The information in each issue is too powerful for most guys to handle. If you are an ordinary guy, it is not for you. It is meant for the elite few – not the unwashed masses.

image

If you think you can handle it...

If you already have girls calling you at all hours of the day and night, showing up at your door, throwing themselves at you everywhere you go...

Then sign up below.

But if you're just an average Joe, an ordinary guy, no one special – and wish to continue being so – then skip this. It's too much power for you.

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
10,858
Reaction score
1,814
Is it a wedge issue if a whack job with no business owning a gun goes and shoots up a school?
How can we predict them ahead of time?

Seems the majority of shooters are gang members or on SSRI drugs.....

Hmmmmmm.

Maybe we should get rid of the gangs and the SSRI drugs.
 

EyeBRollin

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
3,593
Reaction score
1,573
Age
30
Isnt this what you would classify as a "straw man" argument?
No. Straw man Arguments use a false premise or distorted version to attack instead of the actual argument put forth.

Of course there are murder laws just like there are laws preventing certain individuals like violent felons from owning firearms.

The argument is excessive gun restrictions.
Great, that would be a subjective discussion. What restrictions to firearm purchases do you find to be excessive?
 

Xenom0rph

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
569
Reaction score
685
Location
Los Angeles
No. Straw man Arguments use a false premise or distorted version to attack instead of the actual argument put forth.



Great, that would be a subjective discussion. What restrictions to firearm purchases do you find to be excessive?
Restrictions to so called "assault rifles".
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
4,981
Reaction score
2,081
Age
21
Location
Right behind you
1) You’re right! New Jersey is only #2 strictest on some lists. *eyeroll*
Lol no. Other places are stricter. Chicago for example had guns completely banned until 2008, and that didn’t do jack **** for gun crime lmao
2) Right, the only klansmen are the ones wearing white robes.
How does this even remotely address my point? You’re so stupid hahaha
3) Seems like they’re protesting a pants on fire conspiracy theory. Sounds pretty lowlife.
Doesn’t mean it’s not true. That’s what every nation does before their government becomes oppressive. It’s been this way for millennia so I dare say it’s a fact, not a ‘conspiracy theory’
4) if you take it that literally, sure.
That still doesn’t even address my point lol wtf? Are you that dumb?
5) It’s a logical conclusion to their actions.
For all 50,000? Hell no dumbass that’s just retarded. That would be like me saying you only lift weights to be stronger to harm others. Such a stupid conclusion.
6) that’s what we call a slippery slope fallacy. It hasn’t stopped citizens in states with strict laws from owning guns.
And it hasn’t stopped criminals from having guns either. Your bonehead brain couldn’t figure that out? You pick and choose the facts you want and discard. Concede this discussion.
7) alright
Concede this debate. Admit that you’re wrong and that is Republican conservatives are right.
 

Xenom0rph

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
569
Reaction score
685
Location
Los Angeles
So you think every citizen should have an unrestricted right to own so called “assault rifles?” Why is that? Seems like overkill for hunting in my opinion.
Again with the hunting argument that was pioneered by Hillary Clinton and repeated by the left. The 2nd A is about self protection, not hunting.
 

EyeBRollin

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
3,593
Reaction score
1,573
Age
30
You’re out of your league in these discussions.

Lol no. Other places are stricter. Chicago for example had guns completely banned until 2008, and that didn’t do jack **** for gun crime lmao
Chicago is not a state. LOL! Guns there are traced to Indiana and Wisconsin - both less than an hour away.

How does this even remotely address my point? You’re so stupid hahaha
Ad hominem attack. Maybe you should think harder at the analogy presented.

Doesn’t meanit’s not true. That’s what every nation does before their government becomes oppressive. It’s been this way for millennia so I dare say it’s a fact, not a ‘conspiracy theory’
Virginia governor gun confiscation is a pants on fire conspiracy theory.

That still doesn’t even address my point lol wtf? Are you that dumb?
You’re so desperate to find something to rebut you missed the underlying meaning behind the comment.

For all 50,000? Hell no dumbass that’s just retarded. That would be like me saying you only lift weights to be stronger to harm others. Such a stupid conclusion.
Again, you missed the meaning behind the comment which was pretty clear - They are fanatical lowlife gun nuts.

And it hasn’t stopped criminals from having guns either. Your bonehead brain couldn’t figure that out? You pick and choose the facts you want and discard. Concede this discussion.

Concede this debate. Admit that you’re wrong and that is Republican conservatives are right.
Actually it does stop criminals. Gun related homicides are lower in states with stricter gun laws. It’s a near perfect linear correlation.
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

Xenom0rph

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
569
Reaction score
685
Location
Los Angeles
You need a semi-automatic weapon as protection from what specifically?
And this right here is precisely the type of leftist tyranny that citizens need to push back on. DemoKKKrats are attempting to dictate what you can and cannot choose with which to defend yourself. Soon that list of firearms grows smaller and smaller according to their restrictive laws to the point that the 2nd A is essentially nullified....

This is the very basis of the slippery slope argument that has preserved firearm ownership rights.
 

billtx49

Moderator
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
3,574
Reaction score
2,951
Location
DFW
What Libs conveniently fail to recognize is when #2 was conceived is that firearms were used for both hunting and war. Different century, same fact…
 

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
10,858
Reaction score
1,814
You need a semi-automatic weapon as protection from what specifically?
We don't have to "need it". Nor do we have to declare why. It is a God Given right in the Bill of Rights.
 

Xenom0rph

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
569
Reaction score
685
Location
Los Angeles
We don't have to "need it". Nor do we have to declare why. It is a God Given right in the Bill of Rights.
The whole "You need X for what exactly?" argument is the very foundation on which politicians, in this case DemoKKKrats, base their ever increasingly restrictive laws upon. It's an absurd argument to pass laws that dont serve the public benefit but rather private interests.

Tangent: marijuana is a good example of how politicians use "you need to smoke MJ for what exactly?" as a way to keep it illegal at the federal level....
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

EyeBRollin

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
3,593
Reaction score
1,573
Age
30
The whole "You need X for what exactly?" argument is the very foundation on which politicians, in this case DemoKKKrats, base their ever increasingly restrictive laws upon. It's an absurd argument to pass laws that dont serve the public benefit but rather private interests.

Tangent: marijuana is a good example of how politicians use "you need to smoke MJ for what exactly?" as a way to keep it illegal at the federal level....
So I should able to own a rocket launcher? How about a bomb? A nuclear warhead? No limits right?
 

billtx49

Moderator
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
3,574
Reaction score
2,951
Location
DFW
#1 Classic sign of losing an argument. Expand it into the realm of absurdity…
 

Xenom0rph

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
569
Reaction score
685
Location
Los Angeles
So I should able to own a rocket launcher? How about a bomb? A nuclear warhead? No limits right?
Yet another "straw man" used to advance the agenda of ever-increasing restrictions on what civillians can and cannot choose with which to defend themselves (at the discretion of demoKKKratic politicians of course).
 

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
10,858
Reaction score
1,814
...for hunting runaway slaves if we want to be precise.
Really? Is that why they fired on the British when the British tried to take them away?
 

EyeBRollin

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
3,593
Reaction score
1,573
Age
30
#1 Classic sign of losing an argument. Expand it into the realm of absurdity…
Yet another "straw man" used to advance the agenda of ever-increasing restrictions on what civillians can and cannot choose with which to defend themselves (at the discretion of demoKKKratic politicians of course).
Nope, those were serious questions. Your argument came to the subjective that the restrictions are excessive. But you don’t find combat weapons excessive. What constitutes excessive to you?
 
Top