- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
There is a self-apparent misunderstanding of what a Pregnancy abortion really is. To make the understanding perfectly clear pregnancy abortion is the admission to a criminal felony murder. It is then only given a possible alibi. Who in their right mind is against a true felony confession? No-one? However. Who in their right mind is in favor of a felony confession that is not true? Every-one?
Can you tell the difference?
I believe you have been given the educated instruction to help you believe a lie. The lie was told to direct you away from facts about what is being talked about. Pregnancy abortion is illegal as it is presumption of guilt misused publicly by a constitutional violation. The alterative is Female Specific Amputation as it does not require the same criminal admission of a felony crime from all woman.
First a lot would depend on the animal in question.
Fish spawn so no sexual penetration will ever take place so a rape cannot happen. While in the animal world it is the dominate male who wins right to procreate. As a human assuming this roll this would mean a choice can be made on behalf of the segregate of the dominate male, a roll taken on by human. No rape.
In animals that are devoted to mates and pick them out of the wild by choice the answer would be yes it could be rape.
The reason few gun death in regulated area's is people tend to use methods other then fire-arm. These methods are much harder to prove so the murders go unrecorded or questioned a lot longer as crime. While instead if accidental shooting their are high recordings of other type accidental death. Which balance out and are in may cases high the gun violence.
By the way I agree a fire-arming 20 minutes an stretch.
I can see a well skilled person taking at least 5 days from raw materials. A professional three months with a better grade weapon then purchased by most military, or Armed Force. Technically even the most modern fire-arms are on barrowed time. While a well trained mechanic or machinist could recreate many fire-arms with great detail.
Technical guns are a tool to fire a bullet at someone who is firing a bullet at you. Guns can just as easily be seen as a piece of moving art as machinery, or a mathematical practical mechanism to demonstrate physics and calculus. A gun can be used to drive a nail into a piece of wood, though not as fast as the FYI nail gun. The problem is your lack of intelligence has given you the impression everyone can be indiscriminately punished due to the actions of others. Which may be the real reason behind your fear of a common defense to the general welfare.
No Guns are not designed to kill……
A Gun holds not more danger than a hammer or club……
The bullets are what can be designed to kill…….. And at one time a bullet was the most popular way to obtain meat to eat. Cars and Plastic Trash bags are not designed to kill but are both a greater cause of teen deaths then bullets. T.V’s have been found to cause a high number of untimely deaths as well.
"Guns are technically understood to be designed to kill first, they are in fact designed and sold by power and accuracy. The problem is hunting generally requires that an animal is not alive when it is eaten. Note not all animals kill there food and let it cure before eating.
Dispense ballistic shields and helmets immediately the assault weapons falls under the First Amendment by being incapable of holding any self-value. By using regulation in this way it enrages the use of humans sacrifice to reach a goal that is every bit as illegal as the crime of murder that took place.
The idea if orgasm by constitution has a very serious flaw in you understanding. Statistically a majority of woman in sexual conduct can in fact reach a state of orgasm without intercourse. Understanding also a woman might in fact have multiple orgasms in any agreed on single sensual encounter, really has an impact of describing your shared observation as having little, or no bearing over the emotional guilt of forced attack.
Rape is a form of attack, assault that is by nature set against only a woman, as it is only she who will become the border to which a threshold is set for life to pass through. I understand you comment, but find it a bit insulting to understanding as the number of times a person moves unwanted through a door really does not matter, if the door that had been breached by nature may be a pleasant one. However there is a perspective, or state that many woman do share they do not fully understand, and you miss. Do not know.
By law when a woman attacks a man in sexual assault she is in fact raping herself as she is still the border to which an unplanned life is to pass in two directions not one, and a criminal charge can reflect that with the same obstacles of proof. A woman is able to orchestrate a staged rapes of herself, or of other woman. The hardest thing to prove is that it is the woman always the only person who is raped as crime, a crime may-be that the woman is raping herself, so it is this state that adds danger to a united outcome to all woman and should weighed carefully. If legislation written is hoped to be reach with any meaning other than basic principle of hard to prove organized crime.