• 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!

GOP's Gun Raffle In Giffords' District Sparks Hot Debate

Is this raffle in extremely bad taste?

  • Yes, the republicans should be ashamed

    Votes: 14 35.0%

  • No, everyone should really just relax

    Votes: 21 52.5%

  • Other, I can't commit to yes or no

    Votes: 5 12.5%
  • Total voters
    40
Layla_Z said:
GOP's Gun Raffle In Giffords' District Sparks Hot Debate : The Two-Way : NPR

So a Glock is the only thing they could think of to raffle?!? Really!?! Wouldn't a better choice be something that everyone would want? Oh, and it is insanely insensitive.
Click to expand...

The only way this would have been in bad taste is if they had the the actual gun that nut case used. So I voted No, everyone should really just relax all the little girls should quit getting their panties in a wad.
 
David D. said:
In states with lax gun control laws, I think that people just need to accept the fact that once in awhile a deranged lunatic will be able to more easily get his/her hands on a gun and kill a bunch of people in a random, bloody rampage. Maybe you call it a fact of life? I dunno...

I don't think there'll ever be a "great" way of identifying these people, there's just too many variations of mental illness, unfortunately. People are much too random and unpredictable.

Also, although it may be 'easy' to get firearms from the criminal black market, it's always going to be much easier (for the person w/out a violent criminal record) to buy one legally.

For instance, I'm pretty sure most middle class accountants, ect, don't have a "hookup" to call in the black market to score some firearms if the law prevented them from buying one legally. What are they supposed to do, post a code-worded craigslist ad? Hang out on a street corner in the bad side of town?
Click to expand...


How many middle-class accountants without shady connections can you name who have gone on mass killing sprees? :lol:

Most people know, or know of, someone who smokes weed or crack. Talk to his dealer and you might have to go through a layer or two, but you can get an illegal gun within 48 hours, whatever color your collar is.
 
Goshin said:
How many middle-class accountants without shady connections can you name who have gone on mass killing sprees? :lol:
Click to expand...

Well, at least one guy:

METRO NEWS BRIEFS - CONNECTICUT - METRO NEWS BRIEFS - CONNECTICUT - Burial for Killer Of Lottery Workers - NYTimes.com


Goshin said:
Most people know, or know of, someone who smokes weed or crack. Talk to his dealer and you might have to go through a layer or two, but you can get an illegal gun within 48 hours, whatever color your collar is.
Click to expand...

Lol, I get the point. But I certainly don't feel like setting up some strange meeting with the boss of the dealer of my friend who sells weed, especially when it's to purchase a black market glock and I'm some 34 year old white collared accountant with absolutely no street cred. If I'm on the fence at this point about doing the killing spree, this might be a deterrent.

Look, if it's legal to buy a gun, it's just much, much easier to get your hands on one. Am I wrong?
 
David D. said:
Well, at least one guy:

METRO NEWS BRIEFS - CONNECTICUT - METRO NEWS BRIEFS - CONNECTICUT - Burial for Killer Of Lottery Workers - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...


Okay, you found one. :lol:






Lol, I get the point. But I certainly don't feel like setting up some strange meeting with the boss of the dealer of my friend who sells weed, especially when it's to purchase a black market glock and I'm some 34 year old white collared accountant with absolutely no street cred. If I'm on the fence at this point about doing the killing spree, this might be a deterrent.

Look, if it's legal to buy a gun, it's just much, much easier to get your hands on one. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean and where you're going with this. Sure, if you have a clean criminal background and no other "red flags" on your record, buying a gun in a gunstore is easy and in my state takes less than half an hour. But so what?

If involuntary committment orders and suchlike aren't already part of NICS file system, they should be... I've said so before. But Gifford's shooter had never been officially recognized and filed as a nutcase. He had apparently never been convicted of a felony or committed to a mental ward. The people who KNEW he was nuts had not come forward to the authorities and said "you need to lock this guy up, he's crazy and he could hurt someone."

Some people slip through the cracks.

What's the alternative? Ban guns for everyone because of a 0.000001 ratio of bad apples? Shall we ban free speech because a few abuse it? No thanks.

If you have a solution that will actually keep people like that from getting guns and at the same time won't infringe on the rights of the law-abiding, I'm all ears.
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
Back to the thread. I will say the Republicans could have used a bit more sense in the raffle item, but some are "blowing" this way out of wack.
Click to expand...

Very well said.


It is just too soon in time and locale to where the punk killed 6 peoples including the 9 year old girl.

Really don't understand the mindset behind the people who set up this raffle. Is the few bucks they make worth the number of potential voters they may alienate?

Just don't think this is the cowboy way to conduct yourself.
 
Last edited:
Goshin said:
Okay, you found one. :lol:
Click to expand...

Yea I think you search the Internet long enough you can find examples reaffirming just about any point you're trying to make.




Goshin said:
Depends on what you mean and where you're going with this. Sure, if you have a clean criminal background and no other "red flags" on your record, buying a gun in a gunstore is easy and in my state takes less than half an hour. But so what?

If involuntary committment orders and suchlike aren't already part of NICS file system, they should be... I've said so before. But Gifford's shooter had never been officially recognized and filed as a nutcase. He had apparently never been convicted of a felony or committed to a mental ward. The people who KNEW he was nuts had not come forward to the authorities and said "you need to lock this guy up, he's crazy and he could hurt someone."

Some people slip through the cracks.

What's the alternative? Ban guns for everyone because of a 0.000001 ratio of bad apples? Shall we ban free speech because a few abuse it? No thanks.

If you have a solution that will actually keep people like that from getting guns and at the same time won't infringe on the rights of the law-abiding, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

Good points. I have no such solution, either, except to beef of the public record keeping of the NICS file system. Personally too, I'd live in a state with stricter gun-control laws, but that's just me. I don't own any firearms myself, if you couldn't have guessed already.
 
Last edited:
David D. said:
Yea I think you search the Internet long enough you can find examples reaffirming just about any point you're trying to make.


Good points. I have no such solution, either, except to beef of the public record keeping of the NICS file system. Personally too, I'd live in a state with stricter gun-control laws, but that's just me. I don't own any firearms myself, if you couldn't have guessed already.
Click to expand...

Very reasonable. Of course, any reasonable person would rather that nutcases like this guy were detected and restrained before they go off and kill people, be it with a gun, butcher knife or bomb. As things stand, though, there's not a lot we can do about the low-key nutjob who manages to stay "out of the system" and "off the grid" until he strikes... other than to stop him quickly when he does strike.

It's a pity, sure, but life comes with no guarantees.
 
Mostly, people should just relax. I think it's a bit insensitive (and the GOP really should have been smart enough to see this coming), but people are making too big of a deal out of it. No, it's not the gun's fault for what happened, but it reminds people about the incident and brings up bad feelings.
 
Gifford called me today, says she's pissed she didn't win the raffle.
 
American said:
The left has always felt the 2nd amendment to be insensitive.
Click to expand...

And that is the only reason they give damn about this raffle. If organizers of the rafle somehow got the actual gun and magazines Jared Loughner use in the shooting from the police evidence room and had I raffle for it I could see people having legitimate reason to think it was in bad taste. If they called their raffle the "Own the same type of gun that Jared Loughner used in the Arizona shooting". "own the gun that shot Gabrielle Giffords raffle", "the Jared Loughner raffle", or anything else to tie the raffle to the arizona shooting I can see it being in bad taste, it would be no different than selling "I was at the Arizona shooting and all I got was this stupid T-shirt" t-shirts. These same anti-2nd amendment loons would not give two ****s if Target-,K-Mart, or some other store was selling the same model of kitchen knives that was used a in a stabbing or if someone was holding a raffle for the same model of kitchen knives used in a stabbing.
 
rocket88 said:
She already owns one Glock, maybe she would like another.
Click to expand...

Yea, I have no idea why I posted this comment. I think I'll stop posting in this thread.

American - it wasn't that stupid.
 
I think the 23 is the best model Glock (though I prefer a curved barrel sight, a la 1911). I'd replace the springs and load it to .357 speed. Maybe put nice shiny sights on that flat-top.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
I think the 23 is the best model Glock (though I prefer a curved barrel sight, a la 1911). I'd replace the springs and load it to .357 speed. Maybe put nice shiny sights on that flat-top.
Click to expand...

Why is it that in a discussion about a serious subject that has to do with guns, there are folks who insist on turning it into some sort of wetdream fantasy where they talk about guns like women in a Playboy centerfold? Is that sort of thing suppose to impress someone?
 
haymarket said:
Why is it that in a discussion about a serious subject that has to do with guns, there are folks who insist on turning it into some sort of wetdream fantasy where they talk about guns like women in a Playboy centerfold? Is that sort of thing suppose to impress someone?
Click to expand...

Serious subject? How is this even important what so ever?
 
Henrin said:
Serious subject? How is this even important what so ever?
Click to expand...

The OP described a serious situation and deserves appropriate comments and participation. I so loathe these discussions here which have anything to do with guns because far too often someone wants to turn it into PLAYGUN Magazine and describe in detail their favorite centerfold. And such things have nothing at all to do with the thread or the OP.
 
haymarket said:
Why is it that in a discussion about a serious subject that has to do with guns, there are folks who insist on turning it into some sort of wetdream fantasy where they talk about guns like women in a Playboy centerfold? Is that sort of thing suppose to impress someone?
Click to expand...
Some of us just like guns and when you start talking about them we go in another direction, same thing happens with cars. I have 21 guns myself, working on 22. :2razz::)
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Some of us just like guns and when you start talking about them we go in another direction, same thing happens with cars. I have 21 guns myself, working on 22. :2razz::)
Click to expand...

Its funny you should mention cars when I compare the reaction here with guns and women because I have lived in the Detroit area my entire 62 years and we have no shortage of techies here who would much rather cuddle up with a 65 Mustang than a beautiful woman. I think they are strange also. Its like I live in Orlando and never quite got into Disney and the mouse.
 
A serious issue? Damn right it's a serious issue.


s_baaad.jpg

twoways_s.jpg

self-defense.jpg


They're auctioning human rights!



Now you'll excuse me if I'd like to mention the particular item at hand in this thread. What kind of posting-nazi are you? If someone mentions a 1968 Musting GT500 convertible on auction, I think it is ok to discuss the model.
 
American said:
The left has always felt the 2nd amendment to be insensitive.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment(which allows for a well-regulated militia when it took ten minutes to load your gun). I have no problem with responsible people having guns but this doesn't make sure the person getting the gun is responsible. It is also in bad taste because of the shooting that recently happened. There really wasn't anything else the could have raffled? How about a gift card, savings bond, cash.
 
haymarket said:
The OP described a serious situation and deserves appropriate comments and participation. I so loathe these discussions here which have anything to do with guns because far too often someone wants to turn it into PLAYGUN Magazine and describe in detail their favorite centerfold. And such things have nothing at all to do with the thread or the OP.
Click to expand...


Actually, the OP quoted an article with a dishonest title (before it was corrected) and text that was unfactual, hyperpartisan and deliberately deceptive. They made it sound like it was the same gun that shot Cathy Giffords, but it wasn't; it wasn't even the same model or caliber. The article didn't really deserve anything but derision and mockery for its dishonest rhetoric, but nonetheless it received several pages of serious replies, more than it deserved.
 
Goshin said:
Actually, the OP quoted an article with a dishonest title (before it was corrected) and text that was unfactual, hyperpartisan and deliberately deceptive. They made it sound like it was the same gun that shot Cathy Giffords, but it wasn't; it wasn't even the same model or caliber. The article didn't really deserve anything but derision and mockery for its dishonest rhetoric, but nonetheless it received several pages of serious replies, more than it deserved.
Click to expand...

That is not at all the impression I garnered from the article in the OP. But why is it that many threads here which involve guns involve these sort of Playboy magazine centerfold descriptions of guns at some point? Why is that some mandatory exercise some feel they have to go through to prove their credentials to other gin owners?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom