Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

celebrityDick t1_iu5f7x9 wrote

Reply to comment by mymar101 in Sources: At least 6 people shot outside funeral in Pittsburgh’s Brighton Heights neighborhood by Bustalacklusta

Apparently the Founding Fathers were silent on the question of gang funerals

27

mymar101 t1_iu5h7ej wrote

I guess we’re going to ignore all the other non gang related gun deaths? Until further notice I’ve decided the reason the 2nd amendment exists for the sole purpose of mass casualty events.

−6

Rappingraptor117 t1_iu5ouyt wrote

> ignore all the other non gang related gun deaths

As much as you guys ignore all the times people have saved themselves and their family by having a gun.

6

mymar101 t1_iu5pcfq wrote

I think the Uvalde kids would disagree with that statement.

2

Indurum t1_iu5smjl wrote

Why do idiots like you think it is only EVERYONE has a gun with no restrictions or no guns at all? We can tell if someone is buying too much cough syrup but we have nothing in place to monitor gun purchases.

−1

celebrityDick t1_iu6490l wrote

>I guess we’re going to ignore all the other non gang related gun deaths?

You don't have to ignore them, per se, but maybe it would be helpful if you stop suggesting that the violence committed by gangbangers in possession of illegally-obtained firearms is somehow related to the lawful exercise of rights enshrined in the constitution.

1

mymar101 t1_iu6be0z wrote

Shouldn’t matter. Gun violence is gun violence whether or not it’s gang related. I’d there a reason we’re making the distinction? Or does their skin color matter to you that much?

−2

celebrityDick t1_iu6isme wrote

> I’d there a reason we’re making the distinction?

As the one making such a distinction, you should direct that question towards yourself. Peacefully exercising one's rights isn't a form of gun violence, as you originally suggested.

>Or does their skin color matter to you that much?

Skin color must matter a lot to you, as you felt the need to mention it

2

[deleted] t1_iu6l819 wrote

[removed]

1

celebrityDick t1_iu707ky wrote

> I'm not the one making the distinction. You did. You said this was gang violence and so we shouldn't care whether or not a few criminals died.

Nope. I said that criminals shooting people with illegal / stolen firearms has nothing to do with the 2A or individuals exercising their rights, as you originally suggested.

>Should a person who stole a pack of gum deserve death? Or should a woman who decided not to wear a hijab in Iran anymore deserve death? What crime removes my right to have my day in court?

Not sure how this has anything to do with the previous conversation, but it's interesting that you mention Iran within the context of you questioning the right of individuals to bear arms. If the Iranian citizenry were armed, the Iranian government wouldn't be getting away with a fraction of the crap it's pulling right now

1

mymar101 t1_iu7826z wrote

Ah, so the 2nd amendment is for shooting anyone we don't agree with. Gotcha. Maybe I completely read that part wrong. Also, maybe I replied to the wrong comment, but you people are all the same. 2nd amendment is the most important right above everything. If someone is labeled a criminal they deserve whatever's coming to them. Oh and you're pro "life." I was using those as examples as to when do I should I just be shot by any old person who thinks I've broken the law? After all if I steal a pack of gum I am a criminal by your standards and if I get shot by the cops oh well. There's much to callous a disregard of human life online and it sickens me.

0