• 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!

O Moves on 'smart guns'...

TurtleDude said:
wrong-Gun banners want to ban "sniper rifles" but you cannot ban "sniper" rifles without banning 95% of the big game rifles in the USA

which is the intent all along.
Click to expand...

The sniper rifle bans are interesting in that they prove the intent of gun banners. i.e. banning guns.

They are rare and expensive.
They are never used in crime. Simply too heavy and inconvenient to conceal and/or carry around.
They are nearly impossible for a small child to load and fire.
Likewise suicide.

But they are skeery looking and are not good self defense or hunting.

Therefore they must be banned.
 
Deuce said:
Says the guy who gets fundamental aspects of that law wrong.
Click to expand...

you have not proven you have any understanding of this issue at all

we don't oppose someone being able to buy "smart guns". what we find hilarious are people who want to restrict our choice as to firearms are whining that we oppose this type of firearm.
 
cpgrad08 said:
Such technology would probably take more LEO lives since it would take them longer to use their gun in situations in which seconds could mean life or death. Not to mention just another thing that could cause the gun to fail. As the saying goes " The more complicated the plumbing the easier it is to clog the pipes."
Click to expand...

All true.

And an even better reason, to carry a throw away gun....;)
 
OpportunityCost said:
Deflection. I kept a gun in a bio safe. The only time it left was for the range and to take it apart and do maintenance. Personal weapon went with me or was in a gun safe.

She was irresponsible. I am not. Your attempts to bait are ineffective and you did not answer the question, would you blame the car?
Click to expand...

DITTO!!

jimbo said:
The NJ law is the problem. Just another back door way toward banning handguns.

It's the all or none approach that is the issue. I'll take all.
Click to expand...

Me too!

jimbo said:
No that's not all that's being asked. Read the NJ law, which is the issue.

Personally, I'm fine with you buying a .22 that takes 12-15 seconds to gear up. After you remember where you left the bracelet part. Even fine with you paying $1700 or so for the privilege.

Question is: are you fine with my being able to purchase a self defense weapon of my choice?
Click to expand...

snicker...
 
Glen Contrarian said:
EMNofSeattle said:
You can't make it easy or at least reasonable for regular citizens to get guns and hard for terrorists and psycopaths to get them at the same time.

YES YOU CAN...but you simply refuse to accept that doing something so simple as registering a firearm is "reasonable". Your side in this issue seems to think that any gun control measures whatsoever is by definition "unreasonable".
Click to expand...

They are unreasonable...on any level! They penalize ONLY, the law abiding gun owners...and DO NOTHING to penalize criminals! Even my 7 year old granddaughter gets that.
Click to expand...
 
Glen Contrarian said:
YES YOU CAN...but you simply refuse to accept that doing something so simple as registering a firearm is "reasonable". Your side in this issue seems to think that any gun control measures whatsoever is by definition "unreasonable".
Click to expand...

They are unreasonable...on any level! They penalize ONLY, the law abiding gun owners...and DO NOTHING to penalize criminals! Even my 7 year old granddaughter gets that.
 
TurtleDude said:
when you call guns "precious little toys" you have pretty much destroyed any chance you may have had of convincing the ignorant that crime control or public safety is what motivates you. It shows what really motivates you is an almost pathological hatred of the pro freedom culture and its advocates
Click to expand...

MEGA DITTOS!

TurtleDude said:
its an idiotic law no matter how you try to defend it

Why don't you lefties believe in free choice? if you want to buy such a firearm-please do so. Maybe the executor of your estate can win a lawsuit if it fails to work when you need it. But let us who actually understand firearms buy what we want rather than being told what to do by garment soiling busy bodies in government who have no clue about firearms and self defense
Click to expand...

Precisely!
 
Glen Contrarian said:
There's this thing called "votes" - you may have heard of it.

Oh, silly me, I forgot that democracy takes a back seat to the NRA....
Click to expand...

You got that wrong...Democracy takes a back seat to liberal, dougbag swine like Hillary and obama! And any liberal loon..... who thinks that gun control is reasonable!!!

Your Anti-Gun, Anti-Freedom musings, are getting really old!
 
Glen Contrarian said:
YOU are "pro-freedom"? Oh, yeah, I forgot - you're one of the ones on here who says that the freedom to discriminate is more important than freedom from discrimination....
Click to expand...

Anti-gun people, discriminate against gun owners, at every turn.

liberals are always disingenuous. Smart guns are about control.....under the all too familiar guise of safety!

Same for obamacare, climate change and Global baloney.

Smart guns might make some sense on a limited level, but overall, a bad idea!
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
you're on record as being a gun banner. SO its hilarious you pretending that you want to defend the sale of one type of gun
Click to expand...

It sure is...:lamo

Glen Contrarian said:
That's not a lie - that's sarcasm. If you took the time to understand what a lie really is, you'd have readily understood that...but then, if you knew what a lie was, you probably wouldn't be a right-winger anymore, since seeing through lies is what enabled me to escape the right-wing echo chamber....
Click to expand...

I know what a lie really is, that's why I left the Democrat party in 1975. Hillary is a consummate liar....wouldn't you agree?
 
MrT said:
Well you have to balance that risk against the currently existing risk of a criminal wrestling a firearm away from the LEO and then using it or the currently existing risk of an unintended user grabbing the LEO's firearm at home (assuming that it isn't properly locked and stored) and then using the firearm against themselves or a family member.
Click to expand...

How many cops a year have their gun taken from them?
 
MrT said:
I have not seen that statistic, but you ignored the other half of the risks that I raised and I do have a question on that one for you.

How many Toddlers shoot people per year?

So far, in 2016, that number is higher than the amount of Americans shot by Islamic Terrorists.
Click to expand...

those statistics are sort of silly because it doesn't take into account Americans killed overseas by Islamic terrorists which includes most of our service members who were injured or killed by gun fire. but what you gun restrictionists fail to understand that there is a massive downside to firearms that cannot be instantly deployed. That is most likely because so few of you have any understanding of defensive firearms issues
 
TurtleDude said:
you have not proven you have any understanding of this issue at all

we don't oppose someone being able to buy "smart guns". what we find hilarious are people who want to restrict our choice as to firearms are whining that we oppose this type of firearm.
Click to expand...

I know what the issue is. I know what your objection is. But what I would really, really like is for you to present those objections based on reality instead of some other law you made up in your head.
 
Deuce said:
I know what the issue is. I know what your objection is. But what I would really, really like is for you to present those objections based on reality instead of some other law you made up in your head.
Click to expand...

gun restrictionists have an almost impossible time in actually understanding reality. I don't oppose "smart guns" as a choice for people. What I oppose are assholes in office who use the development of "smart guns" as a trigger to try to ban other guns or force people to only buy them. Or anti gun liars who pretend that they want people to have a choice but in reality they want to ban all sorts of other firearms
 
apdst said:
Sounds like an undue burden on our civil rights
Click to expand...

anything that increases our costs through regulation is such when it is done by the federal government. If the second , ninth and tenth amendments were actually properly enforced by the courts and respected by congress, we'd have no federal gun control intrusions
 
cpgrad08 said:
23 out 320 million is .000000072%. Which is a number that does not justify the force requirement of smart guns.
Click to expand...

I was going to ask how much lower it was wanted and what price we should pay in blood to get that. However I have determined gun control advocates accept no responsibility for innocents blood they have spilt.
 
MrT said:
I have not seen that statistic, but you ignored the other half of the risks that I raised and I do have a question on that one for you.

How many Toddlers shoot people per year?

So far, in 2016, that number is higher than the amount of Americans shot by Islamic Terrorists.
Click to expand...

Limited information. The first example could very well be a car used by gang bangers the night before and the next day(when the sun comes up), the woman and her multiple brood from various guys, gets in the car and uses it, not knowing the gun is even in there. There are soooo many hidden reasons for what happens these days, that aren't reported by the MSM, because it doesn't fit the banoids agenda.
I talked before about a wide range of discretion, exercised by cops during enforcement of laws.........there is also a wide range of discretion used by the media dopes.....including obfuscation of the facts!

TurtleDude said:
those statistics are sort of silly because it doesn't take into account Americans killed overseas by Islamic terrorists which includes most of our service members who were injured or killed by gun fire. but what you gun restrictionists fail to understand that there is a massive downside to firearms that cannot be instantly deployed. That is most likely because so few of you have any understanding of defensive firearms issues
Click to expand...

They don't have a clue! About guns, gun operations or tactics! They just get on forums and spout BS they know nothing about! :x

TurtleDude said:
gun restrictionists have an almost impossible time in actually understanding reality. I don't oppose "smart guns" as a choice for people. What I oppose are assholes in office who use the development of "smart guns" as a trigger to try to ban other guns or force people to only buy them. Or anti gun liars who pretend that they want people to have a choice but in reality they want to ban all sorts of other firearms
Click to expand...

Exactly.......................what I believe to be true! :thumbs::thumbs:

apdst said:
Sounds like an undue burden on our civil rights
Click to expand...

It most certainly is....and crooks like Hillary Clinton, are all for it!
 
Crimefree said:
I was going to ask how much lower it was wanted and what price we should pay in blood to get that. However I have determined gun control advocates accept no responsibility for innocents blood they have spilt.
Click to expand...

Boy Howdy on that one! :thumbs::thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom