04-29-2021, 08:47 AM
(04-29-2021, 08:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Regulations regarding the control and disposal of toxic chemicals make it almost impossible for poor people to own toxic chemicals. Only profitable businesses can afford to comply with the regulations, but if we remove those regulations poor people will be the ones who suffer because they are more likely to live where toxic chemicals would be disposed.
This attempted argument fails because the ownership of toxic chemicals is not a civil liberty.
(04-29-2021, 08:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The problem destroying disadvantaged communities is guns in the hands of criminals, not guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.
(04-29-2021, 08:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Right now disadvantaged communities are the ones suffering the most damage due to lack of regulation on gun ownership.
Your logic fails.
I find it funny that you are telling me my logic fails when you have contradicted your own argument. If guns in the hands of criminals are what is destroying the disadvantaged communities, then how could it be the lack of regulation that is the cause? Criminals are already barred from owning firearms. That's not a failure of regulation, but a failure of enforcement. The regulations are in place.
You need to get a better understanding of a logical argument.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
