• 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!

Gay Clout

Cardinal said:
Yes, and that is the explanation given to completely dismiss any discussion on gun control. Every time.
Click to expand...

that's because all that remains in terms of gun control are bogus schemes that are designed not to stop crime but to engage in political vendetta against those who don't vote leftwing
 
TheGoverness said:
I think the more accurate term is a gun sale loophole, but that's just me .
Click to expand...

no loophole. for 200 years you as a private citizen and dealers could sell without a background check. Congress changed that in 1993 and only made it apply to FFls because that's all the jurisdiction congress had. Its not a loophole for private citizens to do what they have done for 2 centuries and there was never any intention or a law that changed that.

Bannerrhoids pretend that since dealers were placed under that duty it should apply to everyone Its like claiming if my kid gives a friend a ride to school at that friend gives my son a dollar for the gas, then its a loophole for my son not to have a CDL
 
Cardinal said:
Wiki knows it as the gun show loophole. Shrug.
Click to expand...

that's because its not based on the opinions of those who actually know the law
 
chromium said:
why else would the democrats be doing this, as opposed to sandy hook? One possibly legit reason would be they were categorically different, that the killer there stole his weapon and broke into the school, so different more complex reform. But that's not what drives politics

sandy hook wasn't politicized with media grabs like sit-ins, because everyone was in agreement the victims were innocent. Without such fundamental disagreement you don't have sit-ins. It's not because "gay clout" is more as the OP says but because it's less, because half the politicians don't give a damn about them, can't even acknowledge their identity

this particular action isn't about guns but about identity politics. The dems are in fact trying (and accurately) to paint the republicans as gay hating devils, and also trying to distract from the growing conflict between muslims and lgbt, two demographics they wish to keep
Click to expand...

Sandy hook was a few weeks after a presidential election. this massacre is a few months before one

big difference in the mileage one will get out of the pandering
 
HenryChinaski said:
Gangbangers aren't taking pressure cookers or lighters and going to school yards and killing children with them. They're using guns that were either supposedly stolen or bought legally by some ****ing hillbilly in Indiana wanting to make a few bucks on the side selling guns to gangbangers.
Click to expand...

No, gangbangers are taking knives and drugs to schools and killing children. Where is all your outrage on that?....it's been going on for decades! The rampant drug abuse is far worse than any gun issues!

I didn't know Indiana had hillbillies......and of course, that is BS. Most likely scenario, the gangbangers are gun running from other gangbangers who are stealing them or bringing them across the porous border because of obama's ineptitude or desired plan.
Most guns brought to schools, are not killing children....they are for self protection from bullies and thugs in the schools....or outside of schools.

Cardinal said:
I responded and gave you links.
Click to expand...

and your links said....."Could Not Be Found"
 
chromium said:
this is the most self-induced strawman ever, as if the orlando terrorist could've killed 50 people and injured 50 more with a knife

we actually have a comparable attack with a knife, at the jerusalem parade, where 6 were injured, 1 fatal
Click to expand...

well a plastic jug and a dollar worth of gas could have killed more. we know that-it happened in NYC. the reason why the democrats are pandering is that gun control is an attack on the group Democrats see as their main enemy-white middle class conservative males. and that is what is behind the fact that gun bans and gun restrictions are invariably a left wing scheme. Lots of conservatives don't own guns. Lots of them don't care all that much about guns If gun control was REALLY crime control, you'd think there would be a fair number of conservatives supporting gun control as crime control. But they don't. that is because gun control is a weapon of war in the combat between the left and the right. Not the law abiding versus criminals. Indeed gun control is often a means the left uses to pretend it is doing something about crime without actually attacking criminals and upsetting those who get their panties in a wad over crack downs on violent street criminals
 
Cardinal said:
Yes. People pointed their fingers at other people and said "bang bang."
Click to expand...

Dumb ass liberals!

HenryChinaski said:
And? Is Chicago gun violence and the murder of intercity folks front page news in the conservative MSM every day?
Click to expand...

Hell no and there isn't much in the way of Conservatives in the MSM....it's mostly bought and paid for liberals....with an agenda.
 
chromium said:
it's about many things, including guns and specifically gun culture/proliferation - this idea everyone in america no matter how extremist has to have access to the most deadly totally non self-defense weapons
Click to expand...

what's a NON self defense weapon? I need a good laugh hearing a definition from someone who I know cannot make that argument. If CIVILIAN police officers have them, then by definition they are defensive in nature.
 
BitterPill said:
Like a law preventing those on the no-fly-list from buying AK's.
Click to expand...

you cannot buy a real AK unless it was made before May 19, 1986 and registered with the ATF before that. and many on the no fly list have no criminal activity whatsoever
 
Cardinal said:
Semantically you're right. People in the business of selling firearms are required to be licensed by the Federal government and conduct background checks. Private sellers, meanwhile, are not required to be licensed and do such checks.
Click to expand...

Just about every gun seller at gun shows is a licensed dealer. If I want a private sale, I go to garage sales, flea markets or look for ads in many venues.....not a gun show.
There are several places in the USA that one can find ads for guns to buy or sell. I shop from my computer.....find a guy that has what I want, close to my town....and meet him or her. It's that simple and no paperwork, commissions or gubbment involvement. Best way to buy! :lol:

Cardinal said:
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...able_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

I don't know why the first page went down, but here are the years 2009-2013. It took me over an hour because the website is super user-unfriendly, but if you put in "firearm homicide" and then the year into their search you can get figures going back to 1995.
Click to expand...

Well I just looked at the face page and in that time frame all gun crimes dropped......more people get killed in vehicle accidents, by bad doctors/hospitals, or from bad drugs...

Homicides by guns are over stated.

What needs to be published, is how many lives have been saved by the mere presence of a firearm. How many crimes have been nipped in the bud, by citizens with a firearm.
I will tell you this, there are several everyday....and just like hundreds of rapes per year, go unreported.......hundreds of gun toting citizens stop crime each year...and it's unreported.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
Sandy hook was a few weeks after a presidential election. this massacre is a few months before one

big difference in the mileage one will get out of the pandering
Click to expand...

They know they need a large turnout. So drumming up controversy where there is none is very important right now. Most of us know that the gun issue is just political posturing.
 
calamity said:
They know they need a large turnout. So drumming up controversy where there is none is very important right now. Most of us know that the gun issue is just political posturing.
Click to expand...

no political issue is more based on lies and dishonesty than the gun restrictionist movement
 
MickeyW said:
Just about every gun seller at gun shows is a licensed dealer. If I want a private sale, I go to garage sales, flea markets or look for ads in many venues.....not a gun show.
There are several places in the USA that one can find ads for guns to buy or sell. I shop from my computer.....find a guy that has what I want, close to my town....and meet him or her. It's that simple and no paperwork, commissions or gubbment involvement. Best way to buy! :lol:



Well I just looked at the face page and in that time frame all gun crimes dropped......more people get killed in vehicle accidents, by bad doctors/hospitals, or from bad drugs...

Homicides by guns are over stated.

What needs to be published, is how many lives have been saved by the mere presence of a firearm. How many crimes have been nipped in the bud, by citizens with a firearm.
I will tell you this, there are several everyday....and just like hundreds of rapes per year, go unreported.......hundreds of gun toting citizens stop crime each year...and it's unreported.
Click to expand...

Alright, interesting response, but let's run with that.

Going with 2014 since that's when I last have hard figures, there's been a 7% drop in gun-related homicide deaths from 2001 up to that period. Contrasted with that, there has been a 99.4% drop in terrorism-related fatalities in that same time period. Is it fair to say then that terrorism is overstated and can therefore be ignored as a large international issue?

Second question. Going with the average decrease in gun-related homicides in that same time period, we will see an annual .5% decrease each year.

So starting with 2015 we will see

2015: 8083 deaths
2016: 8042
and continuing on...
8002
7962
7922
7833
7793
7754
7716
7677
7638
7600

And going on for decades until we finally drop down to the 3064 deaths we've seen just from deaths due to terrorism. At that rate it would take approximately 49 years of steady gun-related homicides before they became equivalent to the deaths by terrorism. In that time period we would see an additional 286,588 gun-related homicides, and that's assuming for a steady decline instead of any random upswings.

Those numbers look acceptable to you? I mean, is another 286,588 gun related homicides fine with you then because, as you say, the numbers of gun homicides are going down?
 
Cardinal said:
Alright, interesting response, but let's run with that.

Going with 2014 since that's when I last have hard figures, there's been a 7% drop in gun-related homicide deaths from 2001 up to that period. Contrasted with that, there has been a 99.4% drop in terrorism-related fatalities in that same time period. Is it fair to say then that terrorism is overstated and can therefore be ignored as a large international issue?

Second question. Going with the average decrease in gun-related homicides in that same time period, we will see an annual .5% decrease each year.

So starting with 2015 we will see

2015: 8083 deaths
2016: 8042
and continuing on...
8002
7962
7922
7833
7793
7754
7716
7677
7638
7600

And going on for decades until we finally drop down to the 3064 deaths we've seen just from deaths due to terrorism. At that rate it would take approximately 49 years of steady gun-related homicides before they became equivalent to the deaths by terrorism. In that time period we would see an additional 286,588 gun-related homicides, and that's assuming for a steady decline instead of any random upswings.

Those numbers look acceptable to you? I mean, is another 286,588 gun related homicides fine with you then because, as you say, the numbers of gun homicides are going down?
Click to expand...

you do realize that those numbers-in light of the fact that there have been many many millions of firearms added into our society since the Clinton gun man and many of those are semi auto rifles with 30 round magazines or semi auto pistols with 15-19 round magazines, yet the number of gun deaths have decreased?
 
TurtleDude said:
you do realize that those numbers-in light of the fact that there have been many many millions of firearms added into our society since the Clinton gun man and many of those are semi auto rifles with 30 round magazines or semi auto pistols with 15-19 round magazines, yet the number of gun deaths have decreased?
Click to expand...

Yes, by .5% per year, not allowing for upward spikes. That gives us about fifty years to start seeing the equivalent figures in deaths from terrorism combined. As in, the phenomenon that has us going to war with the Middle East and seriously discussing banning all people of a specific religion from entering the United States.

In order to start seeing the equivalent figures in deaths per year from terrorism, that could be upwards of 70-80 years.
 
Cardinal said:
Yes, by .5% per year, not allowing for upward spikes. That gives us about fifty years to start seeing the equivalent figures in deaths from terrorism combined. As in, the phenomenon that has us going to war with the Middle East and seriously discussing banning all people of a specific religion from entering the United States.

In order to start seeing the equivalent figures in deaths per year from terrorism, that could be upwards of 70-80 years.
Click to expand...

I am not worried about terrorist deaths in the sense of this issue. I am calling BS on the people who demand we ban guns or restrict honest people from owning guns because they claim there is a need to do so. In reality the number of scary guns in society (the ones that cause so much garment soiling about left-wingers -at least in their public demonstrations) have increased massively. The AWB nonsense really sent the public consumption of semi auto rifles through the roof and most pistols being sold today are semi autos that are issued with 15-19 shot magazines since 9mm is now the dominant cartridge (while it was 38 revolvers and 7 shot 45 Semi autos in the 70s-private citizens tend to follow civilian police agency buying trends). SO over the last 20 years, not only has the actual number of guns in private hands increased tremendously, the number of semi auto magazine fed rifles and semi autos with 15-19 shot magazines has-in terms of percentages SKYROCKETED yet the number of gun deaths has not increased which totally destroys the anti gun movement's lies that the number of guns is what causes gun deaths and destroys the "need" for additional laws against honest people owning or possessing or acquiring firearms
 
TurtleDude said:
I am not worried about terrorist deaths in the sense of this issue. I am calling BS on the people who demand we ban guns or restrict honest people from owning guns because they claim there is a need to do so. In reality the number of scary guns in society (the ones that cause so much garment soiling about left-wingers -at least in their public demonstrations) have increased massively. The AWB nonsense really sent the public consumption of semi auto rifles through the roof and most pistols being sold today are semi autos that are issued with 15-19 shot magazines since 9mm is now the dominant cartridge (while it was 38 revolvers and 7 shot 45 Semi autos in the 70s-private citizens tend to follow civilian police agency buying trends). SO over the last 20 years, not only has the actual number of guns in private hands increased tremendously, the number of semi auto magazine fed rifles and semi autos with 15-19 shot magazines has-in terms of percentages SKYROCKETED yet the number of gun deaths has not increased which totally destroys the anti gun movement's lies that the number of guns is what causes gun deaths and destroys the "need" for additional laws against honest people owning or possessing or acquiring firearms
Click to expand...

Banning guns over this incident makes as much sense as banning cars and trucks just because some drunk rolled his vehicle and killed his little sister, or another ran down a group of cyclists, killing 5.
 
No, banning cars would change the way we approach the issue of transportation, not how we kill people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom