#1 reason I will be voting straight Republican

The web site "municode.com" is not run by the city of Charlotte, and it is only current through Ordinance 7035 adopted on 1-25-16. The ordinance ShadowX refers to is number 7056 adopted on 2-22-16.

http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/CityClerk/Ordinances/February 22, 2016.pdf

 

What a terrible rebuttal.

First off, do you REALLY think that gun owners are a punished class in society today? Really? How is it that in a country with the absolute least amount of gun restrictions and regulations in the first world, where we have the highest ratio of ownership per capita of any country that doesn't require ownership, can gun owners be considered "punished" for owning a gun? This is such a delusion. I don't know if you've noticed, but in the last 20 years the right has completely won the gun debate. Just because people are pushing back against existing legislation; you know, every time a crowded school or theatre or church or street corner gets shot up by a psychopath, does not mean that our current gun policies aren't completely conservative and frankly, open season for gun supporters. If gun laws were like transgender laws, then anyone suspected of being "gun-crazy", just like any butch women or feminine man trying to get into the bathroom of their biological gender, would not even be subject to spot checks or ID checks, they'd simply be turned away and not allowed anywhere near a gun show or store. But that doesn't happen, and in most cases people don't even have to wait for a background check to go through or fill one out in the first place. Most owners I know have a safe-full. So what are you trying to say, because they won't let you buy that tank you've been drooling over, for "protection", you are a punished class of citizen? Please.

Secondly, your entire drunk driving argument is completely flawed. We punish drunk drivers not because getting into an accident while drunk is against the law, but because driving while intoxicated is against the law. Do you think major league baseball should only punish steroid users IF they hit a home run while using? Everyone else is just fine? The act of drinking yourself to an impaired state has caused enough deaths as a result of a century of research and real life study that every single state in the union has seen fit to pass legislation preventing people from drinking so heavily and then getting behind the wheel. Does that mean people can't drink? No, not at all. But for some reason, when they pick up car keys they become a dangerous weapon, and should be stopped. Of course, with gun owners, we don't have similar laws. Only after someone has committed a violent crime does anyone do anything to remotely try and stop someone from purchasing another gun. By the same logic, let's make a deal. If someone is transgendered, I'll accept a law that states that once they've committed a sex crime, they can't use the bathroom of their choice. That fits with this same argument. For everyone else, there should be no questions asked.

Finally, incest, drug abuse and drunk driving are all illegal activities because they have been deemed harmful towards others (historically incest occurs because of abuse by fathers towards their children and it also causes higher rates of birth defect). Dressing up like a person of another gender is not illegal. Nor has it ever been shown in any reasonable study to increase the potential for criminal activity by the person dressing that way. Until we see a massive rash of thousands of crimes, in my mind, at least as many as we have gun crimes, BY transgendered people, or even people dressed up that way, then there is no logical reason for such a restriction, other than plain ole conservative fear about an other who isn't like your version of normal. I can't wait for the time in society when your version of normal doesn't exist anymore.

And yes, while we have protection for the second amendment, we also have our entire constitution built on the idea that all are created equal. Notice that there is not an asterisk that makes exception based on what clothes a person might choose to wear or how they define their gender equality. Every time in our history that conservatives have tried to push agaisnt the equal rights of people in order to discriminate against something that is nothing more than subjective moral nuance, they've lost because of the spirit of our constitution. This too will be the way of this argument, even if it doesn't change the heart of hateful bigots.

 

What a ridiculous argument.

#1 Are gun owners allowed to purchase automatic weapons and enormous clips for those weapons legally? If not, why? Could it be because a MINORITY subset within the group of gun owners might engage in illegal activity with them? If so then your entire point is absurd.

#2 Wrong again. The law of criminalizing drunken driving punishes people who have not harmed ANYONE. Even according to your argument the MAJORITY is being punished because of the POSSIBLE repercussions of what MIGHT happen if they drive drunk. There are literally tens of thousands of Americans who drive drunk and never harm anybody or any property. They're being punished for the actions of a minority.

#3 you're making my point for me but you don't even realize it. Do ALL incestuous participants molest their children? No but we punish them ALL because some do. Do ALL drug users bring harm upon others? No but we punish the ENTIRE group because of a small subset.

#4 You don't believe that all are created equal. You've already shown that as long as you can justify it to yourself why someone should not have the same rights as others then it's perfectly okay to strip them of their rights with incestuous participants. You and your ilk only bring forth this "equality" BS when it's beneficial to your cause. When someone brings up a cause that you DONT agree with then all of a sudden equality doesn't matter anymore.

And I like how you ignored the most salient example that is directly related to the discussion we are having. Why have we segregated men and women's bathrooms for years? We have done so because the POTENTIAL that a small subset of that group would do something illegal while in the women's bathroom was too high to be acceptable. Yet I haven't heard you people cry about that discrimination.

 

And yet, despite non-discrimination laws being enacted in many places, there has not been any increase in illegal activity as a result, showing the POTENTIAL is virtually zero.