• 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!

Obama taps Biden to craft new policies to curb gun violence in wake of shooting

TurtleDude said:
you are not knowledgeable enough about weapons to tell those of us who are what we need for self defense

Its akin to a HS dropout flipping burgers telling a Harvard trained Doctor what he needs to use in terms of pharmaceuticals to treat AIDS
Click to expand...


I know that you have maintained for years the only difference was cosmetic. Are you so vain that you would put cosmetics before innocent children's lives?
 
31619_433371850065779_1937808914_n.jpg
 
TurtleDude said:
the obvious conclusion one has to draw from PB's idiotic blathering is that we have to ban all private weapons ownership because a deranged killer might kill the owner and then steal the guns. that is what people like PB want all along-a complete ban on legal gun ownership because PB wants the state and criminals to have a complete monopoly on firepower
Click to expand...

I support the 2nd Amendment for protecting themselves and hunting, but I don't support people having guns used for war.
 
KevinKohler said:
To some extent, you are correct. A lot of liberals, and even some centrists, want us to be more like Europe, where, for the most part, gun ownership is illegal.
Click to expand...

those people are basically useful fools

but there are several types of gun banners

1) the first are those who actually promulgate gun ban legislation-these are power hungry assholes who push gun bans mainly for political reasons-those who oppose their political agendas tend to own guns some in this group are those who probably need shooting by honest people but most are party hacks and politicians

a subgroup is politicians who use gun control as a shield against the often effective claims that these liberal politicans are weak on crime. Nixon's attack on the dems during the race riots were what caused the dems to adopt gun control as a strategy.

2) the second group are the pillow headed idealists who are unable to think logically. They see dead children or shopkeepers and figure banning guns will keep people who commit capital murder from having guns. Their intentions are not nearly as pernicious as the first group but they are impervious to logic or evidence. ONce one has adopted the FAITH BASED idiocy that gun control=crime control, they are a lost cause and will continue to buy into gun restrictions, then bans, then confiscations. They are religious fanatics

a subset of that group is what I call "the racist country club wife set" These are the rich pampered trophy wives who don't mind their husbands or "people like them" having guns, they just don't want the poor-especially blacks-from having guns. I ran into tons of these when I was a general counsel and lobbyist for an NRA affiliate.

3) then you have the "Projectors". These are people who are afraid of guns. They cannot handle guns without having bouts of incontinence. They figure if they had to use a gun under stress they would shoot themselves or their wife or husband. They assume the rest of us are as incompetent as they are and want laws preventing others from having guns out of the fear we'd be as dangerous as they would be

4) the last is the "they just need shooting" crowd. Criminals are HUGE supporters of gun bans. poll after poll of those doing hard time indicate that thing a professional criminal worries the most about is being killed by a homeowner. Some politicians fit in this category too-its hard to rape and pillage the commoners if the commoners are well armed. rogue knights centuries ago found that plundering villages of freemen in wales wasn't a good idea when 30-40 archers were drawing down on you.
 
pbrauer said:
I support the 2nd Amendment for protecting themselves and hunting, but I don't support people having guns used for war.
Click to expand...

well that is just plain stupid because the guns we are talking about are not military weapons but the same CIVILIAN SELF DEFENSE TOOLS our CIVILIAN police officers are using.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
President Obama on Wednesday tapped Vice President Biden to lead an administration-wide effort looking at gun control and other measures in the wake of the Connecticut school shooting last week.
"The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing," Obama said.
The move marks the first concrete step by the White House toward crafting new firearms restrictions.
Click to expand...

I thought that it was the job of the legislature to craft legislation and the job of the executive to execute that legislation. What is the president talking about? He can't write legislation.
 
Hey ! Biden can start by getting to the bottom of this !

Ex-ATF official's gun ends up at Mexican cartel shootout that killed beauty queen | Fox News
AP

GOP senator demands answers after a gun belonging to a former assistant ATF office chief was found at the scene of a November cartel shootout with the Mexican military that left five dead, including a Mexican beauty queen.
Click to expand...

Of course, his boss invoked Executive Privilege on all the Fast and Furious stuff. But this isn't just gun-running by the Feds into Mexico so as to create the appearance of a gun-control lapse. This is now the agents sending their own guns ... "Here. Take this one too. I'm getting an upgrade".

Stupid stupid liberals. :roll: Stupid.
 
pbrauer said:
I support the 2nd Amendment for protecting themselves and hunting, but I don't support people having guns used for war.
Click to expand...

So, "protecting yourself" is just a walk in the park ? Morning chore ? Maybe right there with cooking your food before you eat it ?
 
notquiteright said:
Standard issue for the MILITARY as those weapons in question can ROCK N ROLL (go full auto for the non-serving crowd), something our civilian counterparts can't do. I carry 20 round mags for my AK, don't rip bursts so the 20 round mags are more than enough- and I don't shoot off any bench.

I can own 30 round mags but since I am prone a lot they don't work for me and I have never needed 30 rounds without stopping.

Very rational.

Semi vs auto... big difference
Click to expand...

well tell me why do most of the professional level three gun competitive shooters use BETA C mags in their AR 15s which are only allowed to run on semi at the big pro matches. and why does Eric Grauffel (probably the greatest practical pistol shooter in history) run with 26 round mags in his Tangfolio Gold Team race gun rather than say the 15 rounders those guns normally come with

and why do civilian police officers generally carry 30 round mags in their ARs even though many of those only run on semi auto
 
Because the 'professional' competitive shooters are playing a combat sim game, not engaging real targets like coyotes, feral hogs and such. Run n gun, arcade games for big boys. Make the game lotsa shots and you want high cap mags. No mystery why they want them. Course change the course of fire and you can drop back to 20 round mags, again no big mystery. An individual's preference for a longer mag in the comps come from the need to shave split seconds from their overall time, the use of the mag as a handhold for run n gun play. you can have a 15 round mag that extends as far out of the weapon as the 30 rounder if a hand hold is what you want.

But I think you answered the question yourself when you called his weapon a 'race gun'. ;)

Law Enforcement Officers do not need 30 round mags- has anyone heard of any LEO dumping an entire 30 round mag at one sitting as we used to say. 30 round mags are for fire suppression, attempting to put the enemy's head down so we could send the maneuver element diddy bop around the flank. Would be a tad more difficult to do with a semi-only weapon, and a lot irresponsible in most LEO environments.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Ever heard of the bully pulpit?
Click to expand...

Speaking of which, if no one posted it yet, check out this BS from the turd-in-chief. Today.

JAKE TAPPER, ABC NEWS: It seems to a lot of observers that you made the political calculation in 2008 in your first term and in 2012 not to talk about gun violence. You had your position on renewing the ban on semiautomatic rifles that then-Senator Biden put into place, but you didn’t do much about it. This is not the first issue -- the first incident of horrific gun violence of your four years. Where have you been?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, here’s where I’ve been, Jake. I’ve been President of the United States dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, an auto industry on the verge of collapse, two wars. I don’t think I’ve been on vacation.

Click to expand...


Hey Obama. You forgot to mention that you had to work on your golf game. That you had a bad hook to work out, and your putting was a mess.

Lying sack of crap !
 
Federalist said:
I thought that it was the job of the legislature to craft legislation and the job of the executive to execute that legislation. What is the president talking about? He can't write legislation.
Click to expand...

As a constitutional law professor, I think President Obama understands the powers of the president better than you or I.

He also understands that Joe Biden knows his way around congress. He can work with the federal LEO and bring valuable suggestions to the table.

The one thing POTUS can do right now w/o congress is instruct military officials to make sure all dishonorable discharges, military cases of domestic abuse, stalking, and mental illness are turned over to NICS so that the datebase is current.
 
Mag capacity would be relevant If he had 1 30 round magazine and fired until he was empty and stopped. He reloaded 3x. Cho reload 9 times. Holmes reloaded a least 8 times. Unfettered. 10 rounds, 30 rounds...it is irrelevant. He was there for 10 minutes in that school with zero deterrence. The magazine capacity argument is idiotic. I can carry 3 15 round magazines and 10 10 round magazines, drop and reload each cycle in about 2 seconds.

The mag capacity argument is moronic promoted by morons who have but one aim...pass ANY firearm legislation.

You might more effectively address what to do in that 10 minute span between 911 and first responders on the scene.
 
TurtleDude said:
well that is just plain stupid because the guns we are talking about are not military weapons but the same CIVILIAN SELF DEFENSE TOOLS our CIVILIAN police officers are using.
Click to expand...

Still trying to convince people you should be able to carry the same weapons as cops without putting you ass on the line like they do?
 
VanceMack said:
Mag capacity would be relevant If he had 1 30 round magazine and fired until he was empty and stopped. He reloaded 3x. Cho reload 9 times. Holmes reloaded a least 8 times. Unfettered. 10 rounds, 30 rounds...it is irrelevant. He was there for 10 minutes in that school with zero deterrence. The magazine capacity argument is idiotic. I can carry 3 15 round magazines and 10 10 round magazines, drop and reload each cycle in about 2 seconds.

The mag capacity argument is moronic promoted by morons who have but one aim...pass ANY firearm legislation.

You might more effectively address what to do in that 10 minute span between 911 and first responders on the scene.
Click to expand...

That begs the question IF the mag cap doesn't matter then why is everyone so upset if 'they' want to reduce the cap? If not important to doing the most fearsome job- one man killing dozens- then how many rounds per mag do you need to kill one man? Course that ASS-umes you can hit what you aim at equal to your speed in reloading... ;)
 
Catawba said:
Still trying to convince people you should be able to carry the same weapons as cops without putting you ass on the line like they do?
Click to expand...

the stupidity of that post is evident. people are attacked all the time and there are many jobs more dangerous than cops. and when attacked why should I have less options than a cop

I realize far lefties like you worship government employees But your comment is just mindless statist drivel
 
notquiteright said:
That begs the question IF the mag cap doesn't matter then why is everyone so upset if 'they' want to reduce the cap? If not important to doing the most fearsome job- one man killing dozens- then how many rounds per mag do you need to kill one man? Course that ASS-umes you can hit what you aim at equal to your speed in reloading... ;)
Click to expand...


there is no reason to limit us when state employees are given 30 rounders

and yes many of us are better shots than cops
 
TurtleDude said:
the stupidity of that post is evident. people are attacked all the time and there are many jobs more dangerous than cops. and when attacked why should I have less options than a cop

I realize far lefties like you worship government employees But your comment is just mindless statist drivel
Click to expand...


How does a gun that you claim only has cosmetic differences, protect you better than other guns available?
 
Catawba said:
How does a gun that you claim only has cosmetic differences, protect you better than other guns available?
Click to expand...

you just don't get it

you gun haters who want to harass us gun owners want to ban guns incrementally. start with scary looks you will continue to take more and more and more



and magazine limits are substantive

I have a great idea, if owning a gun causes you to lose sleep or the control of parts of your body, don't OWN one

but stop pretending your motivations for trying to restrict what other citizens own given your motivations are based on a desire to harass people who don't buy into your agenda
 
TurtleDude said:
there is no reason to limit us when state employees are given 30 rounders

and yes many of us are better shots than cops
Click to expand...

No reason either should have 30 round mags.

Many are better shots, many talk the talk, but few are willing to walk the walk, so when I outshoot cops I don't think it entitles me to anything special.
 
notquiteright said:
No reason either should have 30 round mags.

Many are better shots, many talk the talk, but few are willing to walk the walk, so when I outshoot cops I don't think it entitles me to anything special.
Click to expand...


can you fashion a rational reason to ban honest people owning 30 round magazines


and tell us what the limit should be (and why I should care given I am a far better shot than you could ever hope to be)
 
notquiteright said:
That begs the question IF the mag cap doesn't matter then why is everyone so upset if 'they' want to reduce the cap? If not important to doing the most fearsome job- one man killing dozens- then how many rounds per mag do you need to kill one man? Course that ASS-umes you can hit what you aim at equal to your speed in reloading... ;)
Click to expand...
2 reasons. 1-because the second doesn't JUST protect my right to self defense weapons and 2-because some people ****ing WANT them. The like to shoot 30 rounders at the range and enjoy sport shooting. Dood...the absolute reality is that an average of TWO people out of 330 MILLION per year commit some sort of a spree type killing and NOT always (less than 25% of the time) use semi automatic rifles. It's not even a great majority...it's virtually ALL firearm owners with those 30 round magazines are responsible law abiding citizens. Considering the facts, it is is PATHETIC it is even a consideration.

2 seconds isn't exactly speed loading btw. Mag release takes no time and hand to mag mag and round chambered isn't a great task. A 20 year old kid just did it 3 times with no one around to stop him.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
can you fashion a rational reason to ban honest people owning 30 round magazines


and tell us what the limit should be (and why I should care given I am a far better shot than you could ever hope to be)
Click to expand...

Ahhh arrogance, thy name be turtledud

Doesn't matter how good a shot you think you are or how bad you think I might be- mag cap for rifles set at 20 works for me... good enough when I carried the Mattel toy on a two way range, good enough now that I am a veteran. Nothing you can't do with 20 that you would need 30 for off a one way play day range unless the objective is mass murder but another guy pointed out you can kill lots of people with quick mag changes...

Hope that helps you understand... :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom