Best Gun Control Rebuttal Ever!

[Rivers]

[Lex Talionis]

http://therightscoop.com/bill-whittle-describes-his-journey-from-mental-illness-to-the-truth/

[BJames]

Rivers and Lex,

Well played. Whittle Rocks! Thanks for sharing!!

[denpython]

Ted Kennedy came back from the grave just to listen to this guy!

[Steve1968LS2]

28 people a day are killed by drunk drivers.. how come the left never wants to ban or further restrict alcohol?

So I should give up my rights so the lunatics on the left can have a warm fuzzy do-nothing feeling and a false sense of security?

[FalconLair]

28 people a day are killed by drunk drivers.. how come the left never wants to ban or further restrict alcohol?

So I should give up my rights so the lunatics on the left can have a warm fuzzy do-nothing feeling and a false sense of security?

that's been my argument for years and many of them are children - it never goes anywhere

i've used cars and alcohol in lots of my debates - it always goes back to "well, cars and alcohol aren't made to kill people, guns are made solely to KILL people"

what difference does it make that you died at the hands of a mentally unstable person with a gun, an irresponsible drunk driver, or someone who uses a vehicle to off people

either way, you're dead and it shouldn't have happened - i can't think of any reason why drinking alcohol is so welcomed into our society that the resulting deaths caused by irresponsible drunk drinkers is acceptable

that's just me though

[axhoaxho]

The first step is to stop using their words 'Gun Control' and start calling it what it is 'Disarm Citizens.'

[tomrkba]

28 people a day are killed by drunk drivers.. how come the left never wants to ban or further restrict alcohol?

So I should give up my rights so the lunatics on the left can have a warm fuzzy do-nothing feeling and a false sense of security?

No, it is so they can implement a socialism/communism mix with themselves on top unimpeded.

[PogoJack]

that's been my argument for years and many of them are children - it never goes anywhere

i've used cars and alcohol in lots of my debates - it always goes back to "well, cars and alcohol aren't made to kill people, guns are made solely to KILL people"

what difference does it make that you died at the hands of a mentally unstable person with a gun, an irresponsible drunk driver, or someone who uses a vehicle to off people

either way, you're dead and it shouldn't have happened - i can't think of any reason why drinking alcohol is so welcomed into our society that the resulting deaths caused by irresponsible drunk drinkers is acceptable

that's just me though

Great thing about liberal talking points is that they are easily debunked on a logical level, as they are chock full of logical fallacies.

The "guns are only used/designed to kill (people)" is a red herring based on a false premise. Invite your liberal f(r)iends to the range so they can witness dozens or scores of people using guns and not killing anybody.

As an added bonus, they might give shooting a try and the scales might fall from their eyes.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[lexanidubs09]

Great post. I've never heard of this guy before but I'll be watching some more videos of his. Thanks for sharing.

[kygen]

Going to the range doesn't negate the fact that they were designed for killing, it just means they aren't being used for killing in that instance.

Great thing about liberal talking points is that they are easily debunked on a logical level, as they are chock full of logical fallacies.

The "guns are only used/designed to kill (people)" is a red herring based on a false premise. Invite your liberal f(r)iends to the range so they can witness dozens or scores of people using guns and not killing anybody.

As an added bonus, they might give shooting a try and the scales might fall from their eyes.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Lex Talionis]

Great post. I've never heard of this guy before but I'll be watching some more videos of his. Thanks for sharing.

Personally I don't believe this guy who makes his living now with conservative talking points. In the '80s he hated Ronald Reagan, voted for Walter Mondale and then went on to vote for Bill Clinton TWICE. Although you would have to dig to find that information as his wikipedia page is a complete "puff piece" written by himself. Whittle went on to attempt a career in media/editing and writing. Then as some point in his 40s he seemed to suddenly become a conservative, something most of have been our entire lives, and now he makes a good career playing the conservative media game.

I don't know, I don't understand how a grown man could "hate" Ronald Reagan back in the day who claims now to be a conservative? I also don't know how one could vote for Mondale and then Clinton TWICE. Call me old school like a Mafia guy who wouldn't trust somebody who used to be in the FBI, but I don't trust him. Not saying he is a liberal pretending to now be conservative, but I can't trust his judgment. He reminds me of a younger version of Mitt Romney, a guy who could switch political gears on a dime when he saw it benefited him. I can't hear stuff from people who just try that hard to tell me what they think I want to hear.

Just wanted people to know his pedigree before thinking he is some kind of Phyllis Schlafly or William F. Buckley Jr. who were real conservatives from the start because their brains were wired correctly from birth.

[PogoJack]

Going to the range doesn't negate the fact that they were designed for killing, it just means they aren't being used for killing in that instance.

Guns were designed to fire a bullet. Ask a competition shooter if their race gun was designed for killing.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Rivers]

Personally I don't believe this guy who makes his living now with conservative talking points. In the '80s he hated Ronald Reagan, voted for Walter Mondale and then went on to vote for Bill Clinton TWICE. Although you would have to dig to find that information as his wikipedia page is a complete "puff piece" written by himself. Whittle went on to attempt a career in media/editing and writing. Then as some point in his 40s he seemed to suddenly become a conservative, something most of have been our entire lives, and now he makes a good career playing the conservative media game.

I don't know, I don't understand how a grown man could "hate" Ronald Reagan back in the day who claims now to be a conservative? I also don't know how one could vote for Mondale and then Clinton TWICE. Call me old school like a Mafia guy who wouldn't trust somebody who used to be in the FBI, but I don't trust him. Not saying he is a liberal pretending to now be conservative, but I can't trust his judgment. He reminds me of a younger version of Mitt Romney, a guy who could switch political gears on a dime when he saw it benefited him. I can't hear stuff from people who just try that hard to tell me what they think I want to hear.

Just wanted people to know his pedigree before thinking he is some kind of Phyllis Schlafly or William F. Buckley Jr. who were real conservatives from the start because their brains were wired correctly from birth.

[Steve1968LS2]

that's been my argument for years and many of them are children - it never goes anywhere

i've used cars and alcohol in lots of my debates - it always goes back to "well, cars and alcohol aren't made to kill people, guns are made solely to KILL people"

what difference does it make that you died at the hands of a mentally unstable person with a gun, an irresponsible drunk driver, or someone who uses a vehicle to off people

either way, you're dead and it shouldn't have happened - i can't think of any reason why drinking alcohol is so welcomed into our society that the resulting deaths caused by irresponsible drunk drinkers is acceptable

that's just me though

Alcohol is a great comparison since one could argue that it has no real benefit to society (unlike a car, which is transportation and necessary)

The problem is that many antis drink and they certainly wouldn't want to give it up!

It's odd.. alcohol is very lightly regulated and kills 28 a day (JUST from drunk driving, more if you add in other data).. in comparison guns kill few on a daily basis and are highly regulated in comparsion (more in states like NY and CA .. etc)

So it's not really the deaths they care about, it's their agenda.. last I checked alcohol isn't even a right called out in the Constitution..

Anyways, when I use the comparison they get mad and say it's not the same but can't really articulate why.

On one I said "As a drinker don't you feel guilty that you support an industry that's responsible for so many deaths each day?" The person lost their mind, but in reality that's what they are saying to gun owners.