• 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!

Police: Suspect Carried Gun To Benghazi Screening In Fear Of Mass Shootings

digitusmedius said:
Not according to the gun freaks. One of them just posted a comment that gun deaths of children by negligent handling or storage is "statistically insignificant" and therefore of no concern.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the big bad world of reality.

Numbers drive the allocation of resources, not the petulant crying of emotional fools.
 
digitusmedius said:
If the education was a pre-requisite to a gun purchase and had to be repeated every ten years or so it might, might make a small difference. But the vast majority of gun toters have some fantasy loop in their heads that has them in some version of a Dirty Harry, Rambo, Chuck Norris or Schwartzenegger movie or maybe all of those types at once. It's a weird, goofy fantasy life they've imagined for themselves.
Click to expand...

Everyone who drives a car or owns a gun should have to retest every few years lol

I was thinking of gun education on a large public scale, similar to other high profile safety awareness campaigns. This could be something the NRA could really get behind and support, it would be great PR for the org.
 
Last edited:
digitusmedius said:
Oh, yes. The original NRA was mostly a hunting promotion and safety group. The sanitized history you go by is dated to say the least. Wake up, Rip, and meet today's NRA:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...c62288-59b9-11e2-88d0-c4cf65c3ad15_story.html
Click to expand...


in the 1960s, the Democrats were losing their popularity due to Nixon's attacks on Democrats coddling criminals. Democrats adopted gun control schemes to pretend they were tough on crime without alienating their important black constituents. That forced the NRA to become the leader against the Democrat schemes that used gun rights as scapegoats for the Dems schemes
 
digitusmedius said:
If the education was a pre-requisite to a gun purchase and had to be repeated every ten years or so it might, might make a small difference. But the vast majority of gun toters have some fantasy loop in their heads that has them in some version of a Dirty Harry, Rambo, Chuck Norris or Schwartzenegger movie or maybe all of those types at once. It's a weird, goofy fantasy life they've imagined for themselves.
Click to expand...

If education was required before breeding or voting, we'd have a far better society. The real fantasy world are Bannites thinking that harassing the NRA is going to stop violent street crime which is not committed by NRA members but generally by those whose "culture" strongly supports gun banning politicians
 
yankintx said:
A small difference would be 1 life, isn't that worth investing in gun education?
Click to expand...

that's a silly comment. we could save MILLIONS Of lives by making the speed limits 30 MPH. So if saving lives is REALLY what motivates those who want more gun restrictions, I tell them they should start in an area where the numbers saved would clearly be much higher
 
TurtleDude said:
in the 1960s, the Democrats were losing their popularity due to Nixon's attacks on Democrats coddling criminals. Democrats adopted gun control schemes to pretend they were tough on crime without alienating their important black constituents. That forced the NRA to become the leader against the Democrat schemes that used gun rights as scapegoats for the Dems schemes
Click to expand...

I do not know the history of the NRA, but is that when they got out of the gun education business and became more of a lobbyist?
 
SMTA said:
Good old fashioned common sense.

Intelligent people know how to analyze and allocate results based on the most effective results.
Click to expand...

true, but when the real goal is to harass gun owners and whine about the NRA because the NRA does not s support the candidates the Democrat party and the goofy left supports, you are going to get these silly suggestions
 
TurtleDude said:
that's a silly comment. we could save MILLIONS Of lives by making the speed limits 30 MPH. So if saving lives is REALLY what motivates those who want more gun restrictions, I tell them they should start in an area where the numbers saved would clearly be much higher
Click to expand...

It was not meant as silly, only as an example if it saves 1 life then lets give it a try.

I am no ones side except the Constitution, the 2nd protects your right to own

Until that amendment is either removed or revised, so be it

I certainly do not see a public safety awareness campaign on gun SAFETY leading down the road to gun control.
 
Last edited:
yankintx said:
Everyone who drives a car or owns a gun should have to retest every few years lol

I was thinking of gun education on a large public scale, similar to other high profile safety awareness campaigns. This could be something the NRA could really get behind and support, it would be great PR for the org.
Click to expand...

can you imagine the howling and garment soiling that would take place if the NRA offered an elective in public High schools teaching kids how to handle firearms safely and properly? kids with that sort of training are far less likely to buy into the FEAR GUNS swill Bannites push.
 
yankintx said:
It was not meant as silly, only as an example if it saves 1 life then lets give it a try.
Click to expand...

that's silly to impose massive costs that might save one life. and I doubt that saving lives is what really motivates gun restrictionists.

there are some phrases that immediately doom those who utter them to never be taken seriously in my reality. that includes those who say "If it just saves one life"
 
TurtleDude said:
that's silly to impose massive costs that might save one life. and I doubt that saving lives is what really motivates gun restrictionists.

there are some phrases that immediately doom those who utter them to never be taken seriously in my reality. that includes those who say "If it just saves one life"
Click to expand...

Ok

No gun education

just an idea
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
NRA, still preventing hoplophobes and dishonest statists from confiscating my guns in the name of "safety".


that's a civil rights organization....
Click to expand...

That's the sort of rightwing drivel that we'v all come to know and laugh at.
 
SMTA said:
Welcome to the big bad world of reality.

Numbers drive the allocation of resources, not the petulant crying of emotional fools.
Click to expand...

I suppose that passes for what seems like intelligence in your set. What'd you do, open up a high school economics text book and just copy out the first sentence of chapter one?
 
I see "we're" trying to get cute with economics so I'll play that game by using "allocation of resources" over and over. Well, let's talk about the depletion of resources:

Gun Deaths and Injuries
The societal cost of U.S. injuries from firearms, including lost work time, medical care, insurance, criminal-justice expenses, pain and suffering and lost quality of life, amounted to about $174 billion in 2010, according to an analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data by the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation. Fatal injuries accounted for $153.3 billion, or nearly 90 percent of the costs. Suicides accounted for 53 percent of the societal cost of firearm injuries, followed by homicides and assaults, accounting for 41 percent. Unintentional acts, legal intervention and acts of undetermined intent account for the remainder.
Click to expand...
(emphasis added)

Here's the source for that statement: Gun Deaths and Injuries | III

To put that into perspective, that's about 17% of the total federal 2015 discretionary spending budget. It's equal to the combined budgets 6 items in that budget (food/agriculture, science, transportation, energy/environment and international affairs).

If conservatives really cared about waste of resources (which they don't, we know all too well), they'd be outraged by the waste of lives and treasure that guns cause in this country. But profits for the gun cartel matter much more than morality.
 
TurtleDude said:
If education was required before breeding or voting, we'd have a far better society.
Click to expand...
This is funny beyond description coming from you side of this issue.

The real fantasy world are Bannites thinking that harassing the NRA is going to stop violent street crime which is not committed by NRA members but generally by those whose "culture" strongly supports gun banning politicians
Click to expand...

If you couldn't use the stilted cant and ridiculous neologisms of the extreme gun claque in this country you'd have nothing else to say. Then there's that histrionics: that ridiculous, overheated rhetoric that even the meekest and slightest attempts to keep guns out of the hands of some people is going to lead to banning (and you forgot to mention the "Confiscatites") of every gun. The fact that every gun groper argument eventually gets down to this hyperventilating emotional rant tells us how dangerous it is for them to be armed.
 
Last edited:
digitusmedius said:
I suppose that passes for what seems like intelligence in your set. What'd you do, open up a high school economics text book and just copy out the first sentence of chapter one?
Click to expand...

Books can be your friend - you should try it sometime.
 
SMTA said:
Books can be your friend - you should try it sometime.
Click to expand...

Facts are definitely not your friends. No response to the resource depletion comment I put up, eh? Figures.
 
digitusmedius said:
Facts are definitely not your friends. No response to the resource depletion comment I put up, eh? Figures.
Click to expand...

Reality can be quite the blow for those who are only capable of childish emotional overload.
 
digitusmedius said:
This is funny beyond description coming from you side of this issue.



If you couldn't use the stilted cant and ridiculous neologisms of the extreme gun claque in this country you'd have nothing else to say. Then there's that histrionics: that ridiculous, overheated rhetoric that even the meekest and slightest attempts to keep guns out of the hands of some people is going to lead to banning (and you forgot to mention the "Confiscatites") of every gun. The fact that every gun groper argument eventually gets down to this hyperventilating emotional rant tells us how dangerous it is for them to be armed.
Click to expand...

much projection there. there is no logical argument on your side. And what is really hilarious is your side pretending its public safety you all care about when almost all the posts made by Bannites and restrictionists are sneering attacks on lawful gun ownership.

there are no proper arguments from people who think harassing honest gun owners stops crime
 
TurtleDude said:
much projection there. there is no logical argument on your side. And what is really hilarious is your side pretending its public safety you all care about when almost all the posts made by Bannites and restrictionists are sneering attacks on lawful gun ownership.

there are no proper arguments from people who think harassing honest gun owners stops crime
Click to expand...

What a bonanza. You've used so many words in that short comment that you obviously don't know the meaning of that it's like a delicious smorgasbord of error: projection, logical, proper and harassing.

I realize the only arguments you have are emotional but they're so repetitive and, well, just boring. And that's doesn't even begin to address how you have to cling so firmly to such patently false claims in order to keep your fake victimhood nonsense alive.

I will say, the NRA would be happy to know that its false propaganda based indoctrination has worked so well on you. You have swallowed every lie it puts out there whole and no doubt actually believe every ludicrous lying bit of it.
 
digitusmedius said:
That's the sort of rightwing drivel that we'v all come to know and laugh at.
Click to expand...




How many people are you?



Please to explain, using words, how you feel an organization who defends an enumerated right in the US Constitution is not a "civil rights" group.
 
digitusmedius said:
What a bonanza. You've used so many words in that short comment that you obviously don't know the meaning of that it's like a delicious smorgasbord of error: projection, logical, proper and harassing.

I realize the only arguments you have are emotional but they're so repetitive and, well, just boring. And that's doesn't even begin to address how you have to cling so firmly to such patently false claims in order to keep your fake victimhood nonsense alive.
.
Click to expand...



digitusmedius said:
Back to your old stand-by: projection.
Click to expand...

digitusmedius said:
Facts are definitely not your friends. No response to the resource depletion comment I put up, eh? Figures.
Click to expand...

digitusmedius said:
I suppose that passes for what seems like intelligence in your set. What'd you do, open up a high school economics text book and just copy out the first sentence of chapter one?
Click to expand...


digitusmedius said:
That's the sort of rightwing drivel that we'v all come to know and laugh at.
Click to expand...




...Riveting commentary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom