• 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

What rational person needs a car that goes 200 mph, Ferraris should be banned. As long as you follow the law, you should not be punished for your possessions.

Since everyone who commits mass murder is crazy, lets just lock up everyone with a mental illness. We all know someone who is a bit off, the public needs to be protected from these people.

I sometimes hate the place that logic takes us.


I hate the place your logic takes us to also!

I'm getting real tired of people's feeble attempts comparing a car that is needed for for transportation, to the weapon of choice with gangs in the US and Mexico.

Just wanted you to know how stupid that comparison sounds to those without your unique insight.
 
I hate the place your logic takes us to also!

I'm getting real tired of people's feeble attempts comparing a car that is needed for for transportation, to the weapon of choice with gangs in the US and Mexico.

Just wanted you to know how stupid that comparison sounds to those without your unique insight.

Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns

Criminals don't obey gun laws either. Also why aren't you blaming the Obama Administration for arming those drug cartels in Mexico?
 
I hate the place your logic takes us to also!

I'm getting real tired of people's feeble attempts comparing a car that is needed for for transportation, to the weapon of choice with gangs in the US and Mexico.

Just wanted you to know how stupid that comparison sounds to those without your unique insight.

Guns are needed for self defense, I can't help it if some people use them for illegal purposes. If you take my self defense weapon the bad guys will be the only armed guys.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1061269667 said:
The liberal zealots scoffed at the idea that Obama would attempt to implement any form of gun control during his second term in office. They also disparaged those who disagreed with them. The funny yet sad thing is they believed each other. :notlook:
:lamo

I would say the liberal zealots were very upfront about wanting 'gun control'. Moderates didn't think President Obama would unilaterally announce sweeping restrictions. However a series of rather outrageous mass murders has pushed many citizens to deciding something must be done.

What restrictions that may or may not be finally adopted are still very much in the wind. Reduce the number of rounds in the mag? that means returning to the restrictions BushII announced during his term. A list of weapons that can not longer be imported? Again that sounds like it has been done before by a Bush.

Course the right wing will scream- SEE SEE he wants our guns n our Bibles!

Lets hope rational folks on all sides of this issue can come together and work on more than stirring anger, fear and resentment.
 
"New policies to curb gun violence in wake of shooting." Sounds to me that it could include mental health, because it is a mental health problem. You're just trying to sound like a Republican and imply that Obama has been trying to take away our guns. Quite a stretch, don't you think? It is a mental health issue and my guess is it will be a mental health solution, plus ending 100 round clips, assault weapons, and perhaps another rational option.

There is no such thing as an "Assault Weapon". Any weapon can be classified as an "Assault Weapon" like knives and bats.

There are automatic and semi automatic guns.
 
I would say the liberal zealots were very upfront about wanting 'gun control'. Moderates didn't think President Obama would unilaterally announce sweeping restrictions. However a series of rather outrageous mass murders has pushed many citizens to deciding something must be done.

What restrictions that may or may not be finally adopted are still very much in the wind. Reduce the number of rounds in the mag? that means returning to the restrictions BushII announced during his term. A list of weapons that can not longer be imported? Again that sounds like it has been done before by a Bush.

Course the right wing will scream- SEE SEE he wants our guns n our Bibles!

Lets hope rational folks on all sides of this issue can come together and work on more than stirring anger, fear and resentment.

You are not rational

Any Collectivist Authoritarian who is gleeful about taking away my 2nd Amendment Rights, which was STATED in the Constitution, not granted by Government, by his very nature is irrational.

Gun Control legislation didn't work before. It won't work now. You know what they say about the definition of mental illness. Trying the same thing over and over expecting different results and all that ... :2wave:
 
There is no such thing as an "Assault Weapon". Any weapon can be classified as an "Assault Weapon" like knives and bats.

There are automatic and semi automatic guns.

True but in todays world if it looks military it gets classified as an assault weapon. It's the wacky world we live in and the libs have won the language war on this.
 
Biden is a gaping asshole when it comes to gun rights. He consistently lies and spews dishonesty. I listened to his boss lie today-claiming we have to do something to keep nutcases from getting guns. THE NUTCASE MURDERED HIS MOTHER

I guess what Obummer is saying is that we have to ban all guns so nutcases cannot kill the lawful owners
 
Yeah Obama wants to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. But what Obama doesn't know is that all these mass murders were not committed by people with felony convictions. They were committed by nut cases, crazy people with screws loose.

If this is true then how do you explain the ATF arming Mexican gangsters who target civilian police (and beauty queens I guess)? What one says and what one does can be 2 different things.
 
I would say the liberal zealots were very upfront about wanting 'gun control'. Moderates didn't think President Obama would unilaterally announce sweeping restrictions. However a series of rather outrageous mass murders has pushed many citizens to deciding something must be done.

What restrictions that may or may not be finally adopted are still very much in the wind. Reduce the number of rounds in the mag? that means returning to the restrictions BushII announced during his term. A list of weapons that can not longer be imported? Again that sounds like it has been done before by a Bush.

Course the right wing will scream- SEE SEE he wants our guns n our Bibles!

Lets hope rational folks on all sides of this issue can come together and work on more than stirring anger, fear and resentment.

there is no rational reason for magazine limitations other than to incrementally get rid of semi auto weapons
 
And just like you are not advocating unlimited ownership, nobody is advocating zero ownership. But somehow, the nutjob right-wing is simply incapable of having a discussion somewhere in the middle of those two things. To them, "maybe we should have better background checks" translates into "OBUMMER GONNA TAKE ALL MY GUNS." Idiots in Congress? Why should we expect them to have a rational discussion when we can't even do it ourselves?
there is nothing rational about restricting the rights of honest people in reaction to a guy who killed a lawful owner to get her guns
 
Except, you know, the legally purchased firearms that committed the recent massacre.

that is dishonest-you are trying to make it sound as if the killer obtained the firearms through legal purchase
 
Guns are needed for self defense, I can't help it if some people use them for illegal purposes. If you take my self defense weapon the bad guys will be the only armed guys.

You don't need assault type weapons for self defense, the gun fanatics have maintained for years the only difference is cosmetic. So it will be no hardship on the gun fanatics.
 
I hate the place your logic takes us to also!

I'm getting real tired of people's feeble attempts comparing a car that is needed for for transportation, to the weapon of choice with gangs in the US and Mexico.

Just wanted you to know how stupid that comparison sounds to those without your unique insight.
Just because you want it to be stupid doesnt make it stupid. A whole room full of people would seem to disagree with you except 1.

 
there is no rational reason for magazine limitations other than to incrementally get rid of semi auto weapons

Rational reasons don't seem rational to the extremists, no matter the side. Back when I joined the infantry everyone to include our automatic riflemen (ARs we called them) were issued 20 (18) round mags. Now everyone carries 30 round mags even the REMFs (not to mention the never beens)

30 round mags don't make you freer and 20 round mags don't lead to enslavement.
 
Rational reasons don't seem rational to the extremists, no matter the side. Back when I joined the infantry everyone to include our automatic riflemen (ARs we called them) were issued 20 (18) round mags. Now everyone carries 30 round mags even the REMFs (not to mention the never beens)

30 round mags don't make you freer and 20 round mags don't lead to enslavement.


the standard issue for the AK is 30 rounds, same with my favorite-the steyr AUG (except for shooting prone)

and banning 30 or 20 is not rational

and the Progressives want to limit us (today) to ten rounds

and yes the 30 round Pmags are just as reliable as the old 20 round subcontractor reynolds aluminum jobs you had. I do have a few 20 round AK mags for shooting off a bench. but 99% of the AK mags are 30

same with the Valmet and the Israeli "AK" Galil is a 35 rounder
 
You are not rational

Any Collectivist Authoritarian who is gleeful about taking away my 2nd Amendment Rights, which was STATED in the Constitution, not granted by Government, by his very nature is irrational.

Gun Control legislation didn't work before. It won't work now. You know what they say about the definition of mental illness. Trying the same thing over and over expecting different results and all that ... :2wave:

Oh I have been tested, I have tendencies but I am rational enough for Gubmint work... ;)

Not sure who is the Collectivist Authoritarian and how gleeful they are... do see some over blown panty wadding going on though. Sometimes being over emotional on the defensive has you seeing things... steady up and watch your sector of responsibility.

I'd remind those wrapping themselves up tightly in the Constitution that the Supreme Court has ruled reasonable restrictions are Constitutional.

Same Court ruled the right to self defense with firearms is an Individual one, so it isn't a 'liberal' court.

I'm interested to see what the NRA says on this all.

I'm way more for more funding on mental health than banning anything, so don't knee jerk react to me as if I am a 'gun grabber'.

But I damn sure am rational, just not quite right... :mrgreen:
 
that is dishonest-you are trying to make it sound as if the killer obtained the firearms through legal purchase
Apparently his mother made the legal purchase. She and 25 innocent people are dead today because of her legal purchase. Twenty of them never made it past the age of 7.
 
Apparently his mother made the legal purchase. She and 25 innocent people are dead today because of her legal purchase. Twenty of them never made it past the age of 7.

THAT IS A STUPID LIE, SHE AND 25 others are dead because a maniac MURDERED HER (in violation of the most serious penalty CT can impose) then STOLE the gun (A federal felony) and then MURDERED others

you seem to forget all those intervening actions

I guess your solution is to ban all honest people owning any gun because a CRIMINAL might murder the owner and take the gun

but what are you going to do when someone kills a cop and then kills others with his gun

are you going to say the deaths were caused by the cop having been issued the gun

and yeah that happens. Clifford George and K-9 "Officer" Bullet and Bullet's handler Jerry Norton (Jerry's brother Rick was on a IPSC team with me) were all killed or wounded with Officer George's service weapon
 
Apparently his mother made the legal purchase. She and 25 innocent people are dead today because of her legal purchase. Twenty of them never made it past the age of 7.

So legal purchase of firearms by people who's children MIGHT shoot children should be illegal.


Care to explain how such a rule would be achieved and enforced?
 
You don't need assault type weapons for self defense, the gun fanatics have maintained for years the only difference is cosmetic. So it will be no hardship on the gun fanatics.

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
 
So legal purchase of firearms by people who's children MIGHT shoot children should be illegal.


Care to explain how such a rule would be achieved and enforced?

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
 
the standard issue for the AK is 30 rounds, same with my favorite-the steyr AUG (except for shooting prone)

and banning 30 or 20 is not rational

and the Progressives want to limit us (today) to ten rounds

and yes the 30 round Pmags are just as reliable as the old 20 round subcontractor reynolds aluminum jobs you had. I do have a few 20 round AK mags for shooting off a bench. but 99% of the AK mags are 30

same with the Valmet and the Israeli "AK" Galil is a 35 rounder

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
 
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
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.
 
Back
Top Bottom