• 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!

Active gunmen in US navy Yard [W:69, 700]

Re: Active gunmen in US navy Yard

I think there is, go back when it wasn't broken. Bring back the Marine barracks on every naval installation.

Bring back when it was the military who guarded the gates, provided perimeter security and patrolled the interior, not military civilian police.

For over two hundred years the Army, Navy and Marines were able to police themselves and provided their own security without civilians.

Sure has been a big increase of gun violence on gun free military installations over the past 4 1/2 years. Why is that ?

Liberal gun free zones on military installations has been just another liberal social engineering experimentation failure as gun free zones in the hood.

Might help if the Marines at 8th & I were able to keep the bolts in their rifles.
Hey! No fair introducing common sense into a "gun control" debate! :mrgreen:
 
Funny.

YOU say : laws never prevented anyone from getting a weapon.

I said: well why not just sell guns in vending machines to everyone if we dont need laws?

YOU say: Thats retarded. (a bit of an offensive comment, but I'm guessing you're an offensive kinda guy anyway).

Apparently, you dont get the correlation between laws restricting gun ownership and availability with.... less guns.

And apparently you don't get that criminals don't walk into the local gun store and fill out the background check form to buy a gun. So, in essence your solution is to ignore the criminal, and go after the law abiding citizen...Good job.
 
Active gunmen in US navy Yard [W:69]

And apparently you don't get that criminals don't walk into the local gun store and fill out the background check form to buy a gun. So, in essence your solution is to ignore the criminal, and go after the law abiding citizen...Good job.

Seems like this dude was a non criminal, as we're the last umpteenth mass shooters.
 
And apparently you don't get that criminals don't walk into the local gun store and fill out the background check form to buy a gun. So, in essence your solution is to ignore the criminal, and go after the law abiding citizen...Good job.

Foolish and gives away the fact that this person wants to disarm honest citizens and leave them as victims for the criminals. Because this latest shooting is the result of having gun free zones. Does anyone notice a pattern that these shootings mostly ONLY happen in gun free zones?
 
Seems like this dude was a non criminal, as we're the last umpteenth mass shooters.

This post makes no sense. Grammar and spelling are your friends. :)
 
That's such a bull**** hypothetical. It's just as likely that the conceal and carry person would've shot someone else by accident. Or that yet another conceal and carry person had theirs out and got mistaken for the shooter.

Here's trained officers in New York shooting at a perp and instead hitting a woman with a walker and another woman was shot in her butt. Trained officers. I could just imagine what would happen in a tense shooter scenario like today and interjecting any joe schmoe who bought a conceal and carry license put in the mix.

It's more like poorly trained officers. But I'm sure you can't comprehend that because depending on government is so much more convenient. It didn't help these poor citizens though did it?

Another weak mind unable to understand the fact that people have a right to defend themselves. I'm sure you prefer to roll the dice and claim victim status if the situation arises. I say go for it!
 
That's such a bull**** hypothetical. It's just as likely that the conceal and carry person would've shot someone else by accident. Or that yet another conceal and carry person had theirs out and got mistaken for the shooter.

Here's trained officers in New York shooting at a perp and instead hitting a woman with a walker and another woman was shot in her butt. Trained officers. I could just imagine what would happen in a tense shooter scenario like today and interjecting any joe schmoe who bought a conceal and carry license put in the mix.


Actually CCWers have a better record than police when it comes to shooting the RIGHT person, rather than innocents and bystanders.
 
...because you know the training of all CCW carriers in the nation as well as all law enforcement agencies?

I'm just glad people like you are working hard for my freedom to be shot repeatedly while in a public place. It's priceless.

Its more like you would be the one shot since you would be defenseless. When is the last time a concealed carry license holder shot someone by accident defending him or herself?
 
Re: Active gunmen in US navy Yard

How about identifying paranoid people who listen to the voices in their heads and see to it that they are supervised so that they don't get a gun and go off shooting people? Wouldn't that be doing something about the problem?

Or is mental health a taboo issue and too expensive to just provide willy nilly to people who are nutcases and can't pay for it?
Here's a scenario for you. How about a guy isn't mentally ill but a doctor says he is? The doctor decides to put him in some sort of gov't run database saying he's unfit to carry a firearm. Another doctor then says he is mentally fit. Which one is the gov't going to believe? Or, better yet, how about a vet comes back from Afghan or whatever country we decide to invade next and says he is having issues. A doctor, just to be on the safe side (because he would be responsible now), decides to put him in the database. Or, worst of all, someone just gets their name put in the database due to clerical error. Have you ever tried to get the Federal gov't to give you something back once they've taken it? It takes a friggin year for veterans to get benefits from injuries incurred in war! It takes years to receive back taxes sometimes. And you want to entrust the Federal gov't to run this system competently? Come on man. I would be willing to wager this system, if this is what you are implying, would be far more infringing that helpful. If this isn't what you think should happen, I'd like to hear exactly what you believe could be done.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1062327898 said:
It's more like poorly trained officers. But I'm sure you can't comprehend that because depending on government is so much more convenient. It didn't help these poor citizens though did it?

Another weak mind unable to understand the fact that people have a right to defend themselves. I'm sure you prefer to roll the dice and claim victim status if the situation arises. I say go for it!

Standard template claptrap. Didn't even address what I said for the most part. Just personal attacks. Nice content!
 
Seems like this dude was a non criminal, as we're the last umpteenth mass shooters.

As reported tonight on the news, the number of people killed in these types of events equals out to like .01% of murders, so I think we have bigger problems...It is only the sensational politicizing of events like this by people like you that is the problem.
 
Active gunmen in US navy Yard [W:69]

As reported tonight on the news, the number of people killed in these types of events equals out to like .01% of murders, so I think we have bigger problems...It is only the sensational politicizing of events like this by people like you that is the problem.

Yes. Look away. Move along. Nothing to see here! (Except we need more guns. And FREEDOM!)
 
Re: Active gunmen in US navy Yard

No, you didn't summarize my post in one sentence, you gave an answer to my questions. A defeatist's answer.

It also is a wrong answer. Forgive my bluntness, but it is.

We can do something about this. We just have to muster more courage than it takes to kill one thousand Nazi Zombies on a television screen to do it...
Oh, it's just courage? Well, my idealist friend, what person or group of people do you believe will be the one(s) to suddenly inspire parents to push away those evil first person shooters, those politicians to deal in reality instead of fear mongering, for all state governments to suddenly loosen gun laws, for all those people that don't believe in guns to suddenly become Ted Nugent clones and pick up their .45's and defend everyone else? Who will be this messiah of safety and sanity you speak of? What group will step up and give us this courage? It's time to deal in reality brother. No one is the answer to those questions.
 
An expert with a lean "libertarian Right"? Can you not see the vested interest, that makes your 'expertize' questionable to say the least...

Paul

perhaps, my lean is to freedom meaning I won't find convincing even arguments that can prove we can gain more safety by decreasing freedom. However, the anti gun scum in office has not come close to even proving their schemes make us safer. I also tend to me completely truthful when it comes to facts

such as noting that the stuff scumbags call "assault weapons" are rarely used in crime (which really doesn't matter-criminal misuse does not proffer a strong argument against prohibiting lawful ownership or use)

Since most anti gunners' positions are based on dishonesty (pretending crime control rather than harassing lawful ownership is their motivation), the rest of their arguments tend to be easily destroyed.
 
Yes. Look away. Move along. Nothing to see here! (Except we need more guns. And FREEDOM!)

what we really need are less dishonest anti gun people who don't even believe their own arguments.
 
perhaps, my lean is to freedom meaning I won't find convincing even arguments that can prove we can gain more safety by decreasing freedom. However, the anti gun scum in office has not come close to even proving their schemes make us safer. I also tend to me completely truthful when it comes to facts

such as noting that the stuff scumbags call "assault weapons" are rarely used in crime (which really doesn't matter-criminal misuse does not proffer a strong argument against prohibiting lawful ownership or use)

Since most anti gunners' positions are based on dishonesty (pretending crime control rather than harassing lawful ownership is their motivation), the rest of their arguments tend to be easily destroyed.

That's because they don't have any valid arguments. All their arguments do is cry fear in order to make us absolutely dependent on government "protection," while failing to realize this also places us firmly under government control!

People need to start realizing that their safety is in their own hands. Law enforcement seldom arrives BEFORE a crime has been committed, they typically arrive AFTER and then the job is finding, arresting, and providing evidence so the government can prosecute the suspect. A lot of good that does to people who are dead or injured in the meantime.
 
Re: Active gunmen in US navy Yard

Oh, it's just courage? Well, my idealist friend, what person or group of people do you believe will be the one(s) to suddenly inspire parents to push away those evil first person shooters, those politicians to deal in reality instead of fear mongering, for all state governments to suddenly loosen gun laws, for all those people that don't believe in guns to suddenly become Ted Nugent clones and pick up their .45's and defend everyone else? Who will be this messiah of safety and sanity you speak of? What group will step up and give us this courage? It's time to deal in reality brother. No one is the answer to those questions.


Why are you looking to others for answers? Do your part, I do mine. Lead by example, it can be contagious...
 
Re: Active gunmen in US navy Yard

Here's a scenario for you. How about a guy isn't mentally ill but a doctor says he is? The doctor decides to put him in some sort of gov't run database saying he's unfit to carry a firearm. Another doctor then says he is mentally fit. Which one is the gov't going to believe? Or, better yet, how about a vet comes back from Afghan or whatever country we decide to invade next and says he is having issues. A doctor, just to be on the safe side (because he would be responsible now), decides to put him in the database. Or, worst of all, someone just gets their name put in the database due to clerical error. Have you ever tried to get the Federal gov't to give you something back once they've taken it? It takes a friggin year for veterans to get benefits from injuries incurred in war! It takes years to receive back taxes sometimes. And you want to entrust the Federal gov't to run this system competently? Come on man. I would be willing to wager this system, if this is what you are implying, would be far more infringing that helpful. If this isn't what you think should happen, I'd like to hear exactly what you believe could be done.

No doubt there would be some errors, but what is the alternative? Simply ignore mental illness?
 
Re: Active gunmen in US navy Yard

I got that. But that doesn't fix the problem. That's the point. There is nothing we can do to fix it. Sure, we can blame individuals. But that means something has already happened. That means the individual has already committed the atrocity.

Many things will likely be reported that happened, concerning this latest moron, before he went out in his blaze of glory. The problem is that none were deemed sufficient to remove that moron from society, or even to restrict his access to a "secure" facility. Those that count on the gov't to keep them safe may as well count on Santa Claus to give them all of the items on their wish list. All too often, we read of countless prior offenses committed by these folks yet, as you say, we will never actually lock them up permanently because freedom trumps safety. I, as most, do not want to give up freedom with the silly hope that more gov't power will keep us safe.
 
Actually CCWers have a better record than police when it comes to shooting the RIGHT person, rather than innocents and bystanders.

Someone mentioned this earlier but couldn't provide a real source for it. Do you have one?
 
Someone mentioned this earlier but couldn't provide a real source for it. Do you have one?


The problem is there is no compendium of police shootings that is available to the public. I've tried to find one.


But here's the thing: consider how often you hear about police shooting the wrong guy, a bystander, etc. Quite a lot right?

If a CCW'er shot the wrong person it would be national news for the next 6 months. Heard of one?


Nope :)
 
Back
Top Bottom