• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

Capster78 said:
Regaurdless of the percentage, the number of weapons is still very high. Based on the numbers above, 20,500 weapons originated in the US. That is only in the span of a year, and only account for the weapons that were confiscated. That does not include the weapons that are there and being used. 20,500 weapons is only the tip of the iceburg when it comes to the amount of weapons that flow over the boarder. I know for sure that the mexican drug cartel are not lacking weapons due to the crackdown by the US and Mexico on weapons thru the boarder. Otherwise, the mexican military would not be outgunned by the drug lords. That is really saying something when just the weapons flowing out of the US supplying the drug lords is so massive, that they are armed better than even the Mexican military.
Click to expand...


You think 20,000 guns is a lot? I guarantee you that there are more than 20,000 guns right here in Tucson.
 
Capster78 said:
Well, if you want to cooralate the two, you have to take everything into consideration, not pick and choose. Gun control and Drug control are completely different issues and the strategy to combat both of them would be completely different due to the factors that drive the illegal trafficking of each. The solution to each would be vastly different and that is why you can not coorelate them to each other.
Click to expand...

What are the differences?
 
Lutherf said:
You think 20,000 guns is a lot? I guarantee you that there are more than 20,000 guns right here in Tucson.
Click to expand...

Thats the problem. And yes, 20,000 guns is a crap load of guns.
 
Lutherf said:
What are the differences?
Click to expand...

One is an issue of addiction which needs to be combated by not only law enforcement, but also by massive drug rehab programs. I would agree with decriminalizing drugs as long as those caught with them are forced to go thru intensive drug rehab programs.

Guns are not an addiction and are only used in the act of a crime, or the defense of law abiding citizens from criminals. It is not an addiction.
 
Lutherf said:
Of course if one is to follow that reasoning one must also ignore the fact that there are indeed guns all over and that includes in areas where private ownership of firearms is very heavily restricted.

If the river was whiskey I'd be a diving duck....but it isn't and I'm not.
Click to expand...
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
 
Capster78 said:
Yes, and if guns were not so widely availabe to the average criminal, they would not be breaking in your house carrying them.
Click to expand...

I am with ya. But the availability of illegal guns in the hands of criminals do not, and should not begin with the abridgment of the rights of legal citizens guaranteed us by our constitution.
 
j-mac said:
I am with ya. But the availability of illegal guns in the hands of criminals do not, and should not begin with the abridgment of the rights of legal citizens guaranteed us by our constitution.
Click to expand...

I think they should, because all illegal guns start out in the hands of a legal owner.
 
j-mac said:
Mark the day, time, and post...we agree...It is impossible in a free society to be absolute in safety, which is why any honest police officer will tell you that they are not there to protect you, but rather to deter, and investigate after the fact. Protection is up to the individual.
Click to expand...

Realizing that even bet efforts will fail from time to time.
 
Capster78 said:
I think they should, because all illegal guns start out in the hands of a legal owner.
Click to expand...

I think you are going to have to back up that assertion. That sounds like total bull to me.
 
j-mac said:
Very true, but over reaction should not be the benchmark.
Click to expand...

I agree. But having the discussion is not an overreaction. I realize both sides hold strongly held positions, and often respond emotionally. But, reasonable people hold be able to discuss differences without the silliness.
 
j-mac said:
Deterrence in action. An armed society is a safer society.
Click to expand...

For a 22 year old I am impressed with his coolness under fire. The mall shooter has the advantage of not worrying what is beyond his target as everything in sight is his target.

A great story is if the young 22 yr old could have popped the shooter when he first produced the rifle but that is Hollywood. This here is reality. Am not ready to jump on the political NRA bandwagon nor am I ready to jump on the bandwagon to eliminate all guns. I have guns myself and want to buy more in future. I just think too often people jump on the bandwagon "if only someone had a CC permit" they could have popped him. In a real life situation it isn't all that black and white. I think too often we are guided by what we see on the movie screen.

Buy that 22 yr old man a beer.
 
Boo Radley said:
I agree. But having the discussion is not an overreaction. I realize both sides hold strongly held positions, and often respond emotionally. But, reasonable people hold be able to discuss differences without the silliness.
Click to expand...

Yes, and in listening to the President address the town people at the CT memorial the President said he will be in the coming days be sitting down with "Parents, Law Enforcement, Psychiatric Professionals, etc. to come up with real answers".... I will hold the benefit of the doubt and wait to see how this moves forward. Hopefully it is with practical solution rather than as you say fringe knee jerk.
 
Crosscheck said:
For a 22 year old I am impressed with his coolness under fire. The mall shooter has the advantage of not worrying what is beyond his target as everything in sight is his target.

A great story is if the young 22 yr old could have popped the shooter when he first produced the rifle but that is Hollywood. This here is reality. Am not ready to jump on the political NRA bandwagon nor am I ready to jump on the bandwagon to eliminate all guns. I have guns myself and want to buy more in future. I just think too often people jump on the bandwagon "if only someone had a CC permit" they could have popped him. In a real life situation it isn't all that black and white. I think too often we are guided by what we see on the movie screen.

Buy that 22 yr old man a beer.
Click to expand...


Indeed.
 
j-mac said:
Yes, and in listening to the President address the town people at the CT memorial the President said he will be in the coming days be sitting down with "Parents, Law Enforcement, Psychiatric Professionals, etc. to come up with real answers".... I will hold the benefit of the doubt and wait to see how this moves forward. Hopefully it is with practical solution rather than as you say fringe knee jerk.
Click to expand...

Obama would have been good had he just kept it to the first 5 minutes, and not then gone on a political rant. This is going to become a crusade against legal gun ownership. That is Obama's only goal from this. What a massive pusilanimous fraud the Obamabots put back in office.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Obama would have been good had he just kept it to the first 5 minutes, and not then gone on a political rant. This is going to become a crusade against legal gun ownership. That is Obama's only goal from this. What a massive pusilanimous fraud the Obamabots put back in office.
Click to expand...


I'll be right with you if he lurches in that direction, but for now let's see...I mean after all in his first term he promised to do what you say and then proceeded to do nothing. He is not big on keeping his word to anyone.
 
j-mac said:
Yes, and in listening to the President address the town people at the CT memorial the President said he will be in the coming days be sitting down with "Parents, Law Enforcement, Psychiatric Professionals, etc. to come up with real answers".... I will hold the benefit of the doubt and wait to see how this moves forward. Hopefully it is with practical solution rather than as you say fringe knee jerk.
Click to expand...

It is what you'd expect the president to say. And we do live in a world where people want things done at a time like this, but everything that might happen takes time, and people will have ample time to chime in.
 
j-mac said:
I think you are going to have to back up that assertion. That sounds like total bull to me.
Click to expand...

Where do they get their guns then?n Its a logical conclusion. Unless you are willing to say that these people are being sold guns illegally directly from the factories that make them? And I don't think you want to say that because then, the government would have no choice but to stop the sale of guns period.
 
Capster78 said:
Where do they get their guns then? Its a logical conclusion.
Click to expand...

No, it was a dumb statement you tried to pass off as fact, and can't back it up. IOW Bull ****!

Unless you are willing to say that these people are being sold guns illegally directly from the factories that make them? And I don't think you want to say that because then, the government would have no choice but to stop the sale of guns period.
Click to expand...

don't push this off on me pal, I didn't make up something and try to slip it in....That was you. And you got busted for it...
 
j-mac said:
No, it was a dumb statement you tried to pass off as fact, and can't back it up. IOW Bull ****!



don't push this off on me pal, I didn't make up something and try to slip it in....That was you. And you got busted for it...
Click to expand...

I am not making anything up. Gun makers, make guns and then sell them to legal vendors. Legal vendors then sell them either legally, or illegally to customers. Then customers sell them to other people either legally or illegally. Since we never will be able to control the sale of guns between legal vendors and from customer to customer... the only way we can control them is prior to being sold from the gun makers. Would this be a logical conclusion or not?
 
to Capster78:

This would have taken you 1 second to look up before posting that clap trap you tried....

Ask a cop on the beat how criminals get guns and you're likely to hear this hard boiled response: "They steal them." But this street wisdom is wrong, according to one frustrated Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) agent who is tired of battling this popular misconception. An expert on crime gun patterns, ATF agent Jay Wachtel says that most guns used in crimes are not stolen out of private gun owners' homes and cars. "Stolen guns account for only about 10% to 15% of guns used in crimes," Wachtel said. Because when they want guns they want them immediately the wait is usually too long for a weapon to be stolen and find its way to a criminal.

frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS
Click to expand...

google is your friend.
 
Capster78 said:
I am not making anything up. Gun makers, make guns and then sell them to legal vendors. Legal vendors then sell them either legally, or illegally to customers. Then customers sell them to other people either legally or illegally. Since we never will be able to control the sale of guns between legal vendors and from customer to customer... the only way we can control them is prior to being sold from the gun makers. Would this be a logical conclusion or not?
Click to expand...

Nope, just more falshood. Sorry.
 
Capster78 said:
Deterence.. hahaha.. Well, if we are one dimensional thinkers, maybe. However, some of us can think beyond and rationalize the situation. Yes, you are safer in an ARMED society by being armed. However, if guns were not so easily available, it begs to question weather many of these instances would have taken place to begin with. If there were no one there with a gun, you would not need to defend yourself against it. Simple logic... All guns start out being sold legally to someone or some organization. It is what happens after that, that causes the problems. So the only way to control that, is to very tightly control, or ban guns. Those who obtain guns illegally, obtain them from someone who got them legally at some point.
Click to expand...

If drugs were illegal...........

guess that didn't work too well

find another tactic

mine is-bad guys will have arms no matter what the laws, honest people better be armed as well
 
Capster78 said:
Only due to the fact that countries surrounding them have loose gun laws or no gun laws at all. It is not the restrictions that are the problem, it is the policing of illegal firearms from countries that don't have strict gun laws. Just look at mexico and you will see a good example. They get all their guns from us.
Click to expand...

a baldfaced idiotic lie
 
TurtleDude said:
If drugs were illegal...........

guess that didn't work too well

find another tactic

mine is-bad guys will have arms no matter what the laws, honest people better be armed as well
Click to expand...

Again, drugs are not even close to the same issue. And no, bad guys will not always have arms. The number of bad guys that have arms is directly cooralated to how easy it is to get them. When nearly 1 in 4 people in the states own a gun, there is probably a good chance a bad guy is going to get ahold of a weapon. In places like china, japan and many other countries, weapons are not easily available. Which is why crimes are committed less often and with less lethal weapons. The proof is easily searchable. Crime rates in countries that ban guns is significantly lower than the US (not including countries that are at war).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom