Hentor are you a teetotaler?
And again, you’re reading things that weren’t there. Some day you’ll actually present an argument that addresses something someone actually said.
I’m still waffling between you being utterly clueless and just trolling, but mostly because I have a hard time believing someone could actually be that clueless and still remember to breathe.
Um, you’re the one who made the absolutist statements in the first place. If alcohol and guns are not comparable in at least a significant and relevant way, your argument is rendered stupid. As indeed it has been.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on the matter. Doesn’t make it fact, though.
I disagree. Nobody wants criminals to get guns, unless the criminals were Jews, and this were 1940s Poland, but I digress. Registration however is a step that makes confiscation easier. Gun rights advocates know that gun prohibitionists have and are looking to take gun rights away one step at a time. Those who oppose registration do so, not because registration is bad in and of itself, but because of what it can and has led to.
Which is why I’ve been cowering in fear that all the cars I’ve had to register in the last 30 years were going to be confiscated.
Kable, have you moved from your house yet?
If I quote an example of my doing so, will you admit you are mistaken?
I’m sorry if you don’t have the cognitive faculties to understand the argument or your own hypocrisy. Let me guess, your mother liked alcohol too, and she partied hard while carrying you?
You do; you want to protect the right of criminals and the insane to buy guns whenever and wherever they want, with no accountability to anyone.
Keep telling yourself that.
I don’t think registration of cars had led to confiscation, and I don’t think anyone would like to confiscate cars, not even fast sports cars. The same can’t be said for guns, but I’m sure you knew that already. 
So you don’t deny it, eh? Proof that it is true!
In fact currently in Minnesota there is opposition to a bill that would require universal background checks simply because it would amount to de facto registration.
No it’s true. I saw it in this video made using the gun fetishists own words.
Yes. So are you a teetotaler?
Hi Tequila
That’s an interesting post. On my first day, I took some flack for posting a “wall of text”, and I guess I understand why … it’s harder to read. I tend to type without looking at the screen, and I just forget to indent, or maybe the text box doesn’t like indenting. Anyway, thought I’d hip you to the “skip a line where a paragraph would go” thing. It’ll come up sooner or later, and it’s a handy habit if you want folks to read your posts.
On the subject of your post, re: the sentence, “… pervasive and pressing concern of why people need guns in the first place.”
I have to ask, why does anyone wishing to own and possess a perfectly legal and constitutionally protected weapon or tool have to justify the reason for owning said weapon or tool? Or maybe a better way to ask the question would be: why is the “need” of a particular person for a gun, as long as it’s purchased and kept in a legal manner, anyone else’s concern?
You seem to be saying that you can tell that people want to confiscate guns because they want them to be registered. But then, you just said you didn’t think registering of cars had anything to do with a desire for confiscation. So how do you leap from Registration = Confiscation only for guns and not for every other goddamned thing that get’s registered in some similar way, shape or fashion?
I suggest it is merely your own pants-wetting paranoia that leads you to believe this. But I’m sure you know this already*.
*If you’ve had that phrase trademarked, let me know and I’ll send you a quarter.
Yes, which must be very embarrassing for you. Even drunks can make you look like a moron.
Oh heck, I’ll admit it now. I freely accept that there has been at least one instance of you actually responding to a point that a real person has made rather than to an imaginary one no one had made. Happy?
Oh I entirely understand the argument and why you think we’re hypocrites. I also understand why your argument doesn’t work and why you can’t see it. Which is why we’re mocking you.
But do keep up the alcohol-themed insults anyway; they’re just as funny the fourth or fifth time around.
No I didn’t say that. If I recall correctly Damuri Ajashi, thinks guns should be registered and I believe he does not want them confiscated. Others however want them registered and does want them confiscated. The facts are that if they are registered, they are easier to confiscate. Understand?
I make that leap by seeing how registration of guns led to confiscated in the past, and by many of you gun prohibitionists admitting that various gun control ordinances won’t do much in and of themselves, but are just a step in the right direction.
But it’s not paranoia. Gun prohibitionists keep showing their hand.
But it does work, and you mock it because that’s the best you can do. I think I’ll start a debate thread on it, to see what you all got.
But we know that’s what you are thinking. We KNOW!