Republican lawmakers say they’re optimistic that a bill to allow adults in South Carolina to carry handguns with no permit or training will soon be law.
Permits would still be an option and there would be stronger penalties for people barred from carrying.
You disagree with permitless carry. So you don’t want people to have easier access to the best means to protect themselves. You want the only people who can defend themselves to be people who are privileged with time and money. You want abusers to have a greater opportunity for violence against their victims who wait for their permit in the mail. You want bigots to have defenseless victims who have to take time off for classes. You want minorities trying to protect themselves thrown in jail because the Sheriff’s office takes their time with certain applications.
So why do you want to make it harder for women, LGBTQ people, and minorities to defend themselves? Why is the prospect of their death just as good as unharmed orphans? An armed orphan is harder to crush. An armed queer is harder to bash.
If you wanted to open up a debate about permitless carry Don’t you think you could have just done so? To make those points and say ‘this is why we should allow it?’
Do you really think what you’re doing is the best way to change a person’s mind? These incredibly vicious personal attacks on them? Do you honestly always behave this way in life? Just go around throwing out the worst possible accusations at anybody who has an opinion that you don’t immediately agree with?
Honestly, right now, I want you to explain, in detail, how you believe what you were doing is the act of a human being who actually has morals. You could have simply opened up a dialogue with me and tried to discuss this matter but instead you jump directly to the most incredibly disgusting personal attack you can think of.
Please explain how you believe you actually have a single ounce of morality when you live life the way you choose to.
You are avoiding the question. Why do you want it to be harder for women, LGBTQ people, and minorities to defend themselves?
Do you really think what you’re doing is the best way to change a person’s mind?
I don’t care about changing your mind. I just want you to explain why you prefer women, LGBTQ people, and minorities harmed. I wish you would feel different about that, but they will be able to protect themselves regardless of what you think.
These incredibly vicious personal attacks on them?
That is not a personal attack, I know nothing about you except that you don’t want orphans punched but want other types of people harmed. If you feel attacked because you are in favor of defenseless marginalized groups and are questioned about that, I’m sorry that you feel those ways.
Please explain how you believe you actually have a single ounce of morality when you live life the way you choose to.
I have an ounce of morality because I care about keeping women, LGBTQ people, and minorities safe by any available means.
They are right. Your method is counter productive to your goals. I find it best to frame the opponents position in terms they would agree with. If you can’t get them to agree to what they are even defending then they are either a troll or you fundamentally misunderstand their position. And in either of these cases no communication is possible. In fact you risk a backfire effect.
You aren’t arguing with this person. You are arguing with the person you want to argue with. One you made up.
I’m a person with a concealed carry permit in South Carolina and you are harming the cause you are trying to help. Please find a new tactic that doesn’t involve projection. Because your cause is my cause and you are being so bad at supporting it that I don’t want to be tied to your cause in any way.
The funny thing is I’m not even completely anti-gun. I’ve owned a few in my life, and ended up having to sell them for financial reasons though. And I actually would have been more than happy to have a true discussion about how something like this could hurt marginalized groups because when it comes down to it that actually is an aspect I didn’t think about. Is it actual point for debate.
But there’s no point attempting to have a discussion with a person like him. He’s a little ball of hatred and negativity that’s incapable of a simple conversation.
I see. You have nothing but baseless attacks, anger and hostility. You are completely incapable of having a civilized conversation. You still could have opened all this by simply making the points that this would make it harder for marginalized groups to defend themselves and say ‘I believe we should allow these things for this reason’
This is the part where I simply leave because you have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, you are a person who is rotten at their core. You were not raised right, you will never be capable of a simple discussion with another human being and when it comes down to it… You are simply not good enough to interact with me.
I hope life gets better for you but, considering how you choose to behave, we both know you are beyond hope.
And, while they were at it, they made it law that all orphans must be punched in the fucking face three times a day.
Why do you want to make it harder for women, LGBTQ people, and minorities to protect themselves?
You…can’t possibly believe that’s my desire.
You disagree with permitless carry. So you don’t want people to have easier access to the best means to protect themselves. You want the only people who can defend themselves to be people who are privileged with time and money. You want abusers to have a greater opportunity for violence against their victims who wait for their permit in the mail. You want bigots to have defenseless victims who have to take time off for classes. You want minorities trying to protect themselves thrown in jail because the Sheriff’s office takes their time with certain applications.
So why do you want to make it harder for women, LGBTQ people, and minorities to defend themselves? Why is the prospect of their death just as good as unharmed orphans? An armed orphan is harder to crush. An armed queer is harder to bash.
If you wanted to open up a debate about permitless carry Don’t you think you could have just done so? To make those points and say ‘this is why we should allow it?’
Do you really think what you’re doing is the best way to change a person’s mind? These incredibly vicious personal attacks on them? Do you honestly always behave this way in life? Just go around throwing out the worst possible accusations at anybody who has an opinion that you don’t immediately agree with?
Honestly, right now, I want you to explain, in detail, how you believe what you were doing is the act of a human being who actually has morals. You could have simply opened up a dialogue with me and tried to discuss this matter but instead you jump directly to the most incredibly disgusting personal attack you can think of.
Please explain how you believe you actually have a single ounce of morality when you live life the way you choose to.
You are avoiding the question. Why do you want it to be harder for women, LGBTQ people, and minorities to defend themselves?
I don’t care about changing your mind. I just want you to explain why you prefer women, LGBTQ people, and minorities harmed. I wish you would feel different about that, but they will be able to protect themselves regardless of what you think.
That is not a personal attack, I know nothing about you except that you don’t want orphans punched but want other types of people harmed. If you feel attacked because you are in favor of defenseless marginalized groups and are questioned about that, I’m sorry that you feel those ways.
I have an ounce of morality because I care about keeping women, LGBTQ people, and minorities safe by any available means.
They are right. Your method is counter productive to your goals. I find it best to frame the opponents position in terms they would agree with. If you can’t get them to agree to what they are even defending then they are either a troll or you fundamentally misunderstand their position. And in either of these cases no communication is possible. In fact you risk a backfire effect.
You aren’t arguing with this person. You are arguing with the person you want to argue with. One you made up.
I’m a person with a concealed carry permit in South Carolina and you are harming the cause you are trying to help. Please find a new tactic that doesn’t involve projection. Because your cause is my cause and you are being so bad at supporting it that I don’t want to be tied to your cause in any way.
The funny thing is I’m not even completely anti-gun. I’ve owned a few in my life, and ended up having to sell them for financial reasons though. And I actually would have been more than happy to have a true discussion about how something like this could hurt marginalized groups because when it comes down to it that actually is an aspect I didn’t think about. Is it actual point for debate.
But there’s no point attempting to have a discussion with a person like him. He’s a little ball of hatred and negativity that’s incapable of a simple conversation.
I see. You have nothing but baseless attacks, anger and hostility. You are completely incapable of having a civilized conversation. You still could have opened all this by simply making the points that this would make it harder for marginalized groups to defend themselves and say ‘I believe we should allow these things for this reason’
This is the part where I simply leave because you have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, you are a person who is rotten at their core. You were not raised right, you will never be capable of a simple discussion with another human being and when it comes down to it… You are simply not good enough to interact with me.
I hope life gets better for you but, considering how you choose to behave, we both know you are beyond hope.