XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons   
   XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival   
   From: atlas-bugged@invalid.invalid   
      
   In article ,   
    BeamMeUpScotty   
     wrote:   
      
   > On 11/2/2014 11:04 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:   
   > > In article ,   
   > >  BeamMeUpScotty   
   > >   >  EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> On 11/1/2014 2:32 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:   
   > >>>> And as you Liberals say....  "If it saves just one child it's worth it".   
   > >>>>> I love using your own words to inform you....   
   > >>   
   > >>> so you believe it's irrational to save a childs life? figures   
   > >>>   
   > >>   
   > >> Why do Liberals (Obama in particular) NOT want a quarantine that will   
   > >> save a child's life?   
   > >   
   > > why do conservatives want big brother to interfere in the lives of   
   > > individuals?   
   > I don't think they do, and I know I don't...   
      
   really? Kaci Hickox would disagree with you. In fact she should be the   
   conservatives next female hero...she stood up to big brother and won   
      
      
    but it's the lesser of two   
   > evils and as long as you can ban guns which is a right clearly protected   
   > by the constitution then there is NO way that you can say this would be   
   > unconstitutional.   
      
   but guns aren't banned   
      
      
   >   
   > I'm actually using Liberals interpretation of the constitution like they   
   > want it used and I'm applying equally to the entire constitution.   
   >   
   > If you ban or infringe on gun owners rights then you have to do the same   
   > by using the same logic when it comes to public safety and diseases.   
   > Death is Death and potential death is the same be it by a gun or Ebola.   
      
   strawman detected   
      
      
      
   >   
   > We have to regulate guns because Liberals fear guns and say that it's a   
   > public health risk, well so is Ebola.  The fair thing to do and the   
   > right thing is to treat them equal under the same clause you use yo   
   > justify over 30,000 regulations including a waiting period for guns.   
      
   yes, because the vast majority of people who buy guns already have guns.   
   and of course you are against background checks on these gun purchases   
      
      
   >   
   > A waiting period for travel from Ebolaland and a and waiting period for   
   > guns is obviously a Liberal imperative and you are violating your own   
   > Liberal logic and NOT being fair when you have a waiting period for one   
   > and not the other based on the fear and the potential death.   
      
   you don't want a waiting period on travel from ebolaland, you want a   
   ban, so using your logic if we ban travel from ebolaland, we should ban   
   the sale of guns...thank you   
      
      
   >   
   > How many people has the waiting period saved?  We don't know and how   
   > many people will a ban on flights from EbolaLand save "again we don't   
   > know"   
      
   you're basing your arguments on an awful lot of "we don't know". what we   
   do know is that only one person who wasn't a doctor has come into the US   
   and that seems to have generated a whole lot of hysteria   
      
      
    We do know that Liberals think waiting periods and background   
   > checks to see if people are dangerous is a good idea and every person   
   > from EbolaLand is a potential terrorist.   
   >   
   > *THINK OF THE EBOLA ISOLATION AS A WAITING PERIOD FOR A GUN*   
      
      
   *THINK OF BANNING TRAVEL FROM EBOLALAND AS THE BANNING OF GUN SALES*   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)