• 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!

Well i'll be damned! Even due process!

Black Dog said:
So prisoners should have free access to guns? How about domestic abusers?

Your argument makes no sense at all. Before making an ignorant snap judgement, you might want to examine the bill.
Click to expand...

We're not talking about domestic abusers here, we're talking about alleged domestic abusers. If you haven't been convicted of a crime, the government has no right to rob you of your freedoms. This is every bit as bad, if not worse, than laws requiring officers to make an arrest at every domestic violence call.
 
Black Dog said:
So prisoners should have free access to guns? How about domestic abusers?
Click to expand...

WTF are you babbling about do you not know prisoners are locked up where they have no ACCESS to guns. Once released what are they? CITIZENS who have paid their debt to society. IOf you don't like them it is your problem lobby for a law that removes their rights without due process. Oh that would be unconstitutional..... unless the public say no we can do that.

What did it take to remove the idiots support of slavery, of women's right to vote, of idiotic prohibition of alcohol? But no idiots want to keep right on making such laws. When are we going to learn rights belong to everyone. Not the select elitist idiots.

Domestic abusers are who, can you identify them and show there are no present laws to deal with that situation? What new law is needed and why?
 
Last edited:
Black Dog said:
Irelivent. People are or get unhappy about a lot of things.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what government thinks when it knocks on your door to do what it wants.
 
Crimefree said:
That is exactly what government thinks when it knocks on your door to do what it wants.
Click to expand...

#1 The government does not think anything. Some members think this some don't. Useless knee-jerk blanket statements are not arguments.
 
Crimefree said:
WTF are you babbling about do you not know prisoners are locked up where they have no ACCESS to guns. Once released what are they? CITIZENS who have paid their debt to society. IOf you don't like them it is your problem lobby for a law that removes their rights without due process. Oh that would be unconstitutional..... unless the public say no we can do that.

What did it take to remove the idiots support of slavery, of women's right to vote, of idiotic prohibition of alcohol? But no idiots want to keep right on making such laws. When are we going to learn rights belong to everyone. Not the select elitist idiots.

Domestic abusers are who, can you identify them and show there are no present laws to deal with that situation? What new law is needed and why?
Click to expand...

Not giving any responses to over the top hyperbolic attacks.
 
LagerHead said:
We're not talking about domestic abusers here, we're talking about alleged domestic abusers. If you haven't been convicted of a crime, the government has no right to rob you of your freedoms. This is every bit as bad, if not worse, than laws requiring officers to make an arrest at every domestic violence call.
Click to expand...

This is true. It however does not change the fact that people with violent mental problems should not have access to firearms at all. Again the 2nd Amendment is not according to the SCOTUS unlimited.
 
Black Dog said:
This is true. It however does not change the fact that people with violent mental problems should not have access to firearms at all. Again the 2nd Amendment is not according to the SCOTUS unlimited.
Click to expand...

I never argued any differently.
 
Black Dog said:
#1 The government does not think anything. Some members think this some don't. Useless knee-jerk blanket statements are not arguments.
Click to expand...

The people of Louisiana would differ on our myopic view as would if they could the 262 million who thought it would never happen. That is by the way six yes 6 times more than all the wars.

History is full of the never happen stupidity governments loves so much. People who are incapable of learning from history.

Knee jerk? Blanket statements? Do you know what you are talking about. Do any time you want show me what the purpose of gun control is. Back it up with evidence would be nice. Don't tell me it has no purpose or you don't know.

"The government does not think any thing" is a blanket statement as the last sentence. Your point is?
 
Black Dog said:
This is true. It however does not change the fact that people with violent mental problems should not have access to firearms at all. Again the 2nd Amendment is not according to the SCOTUS unlimited.
Click to expand...

WTF has some judge's opinion got to do with what the constitution states very very clearly? Name a limitation that is constitutional? While it is true you cannot prove there maybe a limitation that does not infringe the right, I'll bet my house on the fact nobody can produce one.
 
Black Dog said:
Not giving any responses to over the top hyperbolic attacks.
Click to expand...

Good excuse, I'll remember it, thanks.

Here try this

Do you not know prisoners are locked up where they have no ACCESS to guns. Once released what are they? CITIZENS who have paid their debt to society. If you don't like them it is your problem, lobby for a law that removes their rights without due process. Oh! that would be unconstitutional..... unless the public say no we can do that.

What did it take to remove the nice intelligent thinking people who supported slavery, women's right to vote, what proved to be extremely foolish prohibition of alcohol? But no lazy or easily mislead people who cannot learn from history want to keep right on making such laws. When are we going to learn rights belong to everyone. Not the select elitist people who simply without a shred of evidence just believe.

Domestic abusers are who, can you identify them and show there are no present laws to deal with that situation? What new law is needed and why?
 
Last edited:
Black Dog said:
This is true. It however does not change the fact that people with violent mental problems should not have access to firearms at all.
Click to expand...

Do we not have laws to deal with this problem? In what way are they deficient or unsuitable? You do appreciate that there is no black and white here don't you?. You are going to ensure those who do not deserve to be denied their rights are not. What precautions do you suggest?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom