Weer’d: “What would you need to see to reverse your opinion of gun control laws?”
James Kelly: “Evidence that handguns aren’t deadly weapons with no other meaningful purpose than to kill or inflict injury? Evidence that legally-owned handguns have not been used to kill innocent people?”
So James (A Subject of the Crown in Scotland) Is against lawful ownership of firearms. He has also sated he is against Lawful Personal Defense, and justifiable homicide
He also sees it as reasonable to ban anything that can be both lawfully possessed, and used to kill innocent people. Namely EVERYTHING.
Is it a surprise James Supports the UK’s Foolish knife laws as well?
Do not trust supporters of gun control, for they will never stop until we are all slaves.
I’d like to invite James to Baltimore. West Baltimore, where The Wire was set.
…yeah, that should do it.
Why, he lives in Scotland, which is far more of a 3rd world hellhole.
I’m sure he’d love it, it’s a gun-free utopia just like his crime free paradise Scotland, right?
You’re disarmed, so by his logic that makes Baltimore safer.
Evidence that handguns aren’t deadly weapons with no other meaningful purpose than to kill or inflict injury
See shooting, target in the encyclopedia.
Evidence that legally-owned handguns have not been used to kill innocent people?”
So the fact that we have a right to keep and bear arms doesn’t matter. So the fact that we have evidence that legally owned firearms prevent crimes and saves lives doesn’t matter — he wants proof that legally owned items haven’t been used to kill.
Guess he is going to be advocating the banning of crosses next.
James Kelly is one I invite to STFU
I in no way think his answer is obvious, but STFU is probably a good idea for him.
Still “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
-Napoleon Bonaparte
Weer’d,
This was written just after I made my post….still on a bit of a rant.
Normally I would agree completely but there comes a time when the antis have to answer up or shut up.
I hear them advocating all manners of restrictions on the law abiding but they fail to make the case it would stop the U.K. mass shooting or the church murder.
Until they show how their ideas address those crimes….occasionally I just want them to shut up.
Conversing with Jimmy is about as useful as trying to have a philosophical debate with a two year old. No matter how many facts, figures, statistics, studies, realities, and historical precedents you bring to bear, his opinion is his opinion, and that opinion is enough, in his opinion, to abridge all other people’s rights, no matter how intrinsic, important, or essential that right might be.
In short, as you said, he is nothing more than a faith-based zealot, is due the same amount of respect you would show one in an honest debate, and is doing far more damage to his belief positions than he might ever believe or think.
That he is an incorrigible ass while doing all those things simply makes his repeatedly falling on his face that much more amusing.
That’s why I didn’t converse with him. I was hunting, and I got my bag-limit of anti-rights bigot tipping his hand.
And then I went home and Bought an AK-47 : ]
That was the best reply, I think.
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection
Pingback: Weer'd World » Pro-Gun Projection