Welcome To The Club, Huskers

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by InWalkedBud, Sep 7, 2023.

  1. 9royhobbs

    9royhobbs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    15,141
    Likes Received:
    5,597
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not true.
    No, YOU'RE not talking about it because it doesn't help your argument but the fact is that's the basis of the law.
    Not with your usage of the term.....dude.
    I could do all 50. Why should I, you've already lost the argument. You're best comeback was, "well, it should". Case closed.
    Proves my point above. The law doesn't make sense TO YOU! Your thoughts on the law are not relevant. I'd love to see you in court giving your argument. You will lose.
     
  2. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,693
    Likes Received:
    7,745
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Quote the statute then fella. O wait: You already did and a per se thing is not what is has.

    Because I'm pointing out the blanket prohibition style laws are silly and that PER SE (as in EVERY TIME) you're not ALWAYS endangering anyone just because you fire a gun at an arbitrary distance from a dwelling with no regard in the law for which direction the bullet is traveling.
    See how that works?

    Actually is pretty clear.

    You haven't even been right on 100% of the one's you've pulled, making my point. So go for more. Please do.

    This isn't a courtroom dude, you don't make this sort of argument in court but in the legislature and similar peanut gallery public opinion forums like this one.. See how that works?
     
  3. 9royhobbs

    9royhobbs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    15,141
    Likes Received:
    5,597
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ok, so you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. The fact that the actual law doesn't agree with your argument doesn't matter to you......per se, so the it's pointless to continue with you. You lost, you know it but you just want to keep beating the horse....per se.
     
  4. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,693
    Likes Received:
    7,745
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What has been lost on you for more than a full day is that I am saying the per se laws don't make sense and are overbroad.

    Further: Of the states whose statutes you pulled, less than 100% of them had a per se within x feet of a dwelling rule. Which was my point in having you cite those statutes, and a point you disagreed with. You claimed all 50 states had them, and you showed us that you were incorrect.
    That's my favorite way to teach someone something.
    You're welcome.
     
  5. 9royhobbs

    9royhobbs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    15,141
    Likes Received:
    5,597
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it hasn't been lost on me. I just don't agree with you.
    Really? How do you know? You didn't check any of them.
    I did no such thing
    Thanks for nothing
     

Share This Page