• 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
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...


:rofl

A raffle is hardly a "serious situation". Who died and made you thread-content hall monitor? If you think a post is off-topic, report the damned thing and let the mods do their job. :)
 
Jerry said:
I suppose you would also argue that a car is principally designed to burn fuel, as opposed to consuming fuel in due course of performing it's function: transportation.

I do appreciate your concession noted in bold, that guns are killing machines, not murder machines; though you should still refrain from voting so as to not pose an ongoing threat to society.
Click to expand...

That is ridiculous. Guns are for firing bullets just as cars are for driving as a transportation vehicle.
 
David D. said:
American said:
Gifford called me today, says she's pissed she didn't win the raffle.
Click to expand...
Stupid comment.
Click to expand...

American, I believe you misunderstand David D's post.

He wasn't saying you had made a stupid comment, he was saying all he has left to offer you is a stupid comment, and thus that's exactly what he posted.
 
Last edited:
DiAnna said:
:rofl

A raffle is hardly a "serious situation". Who died and made you thread-content hall monitor? If you think a post is off-topic, report the damned thing and let the mods do their job. :)
Click to expand...

Who died and made you the judge of how something should be handled? If you don't like my approach, report it to the mods and let them do their job.

WOW!!!! that felt good!!!! Hey Dianna - nice approach and thanks for the modeling. ;) I never would have thought to get all worked up and hot under the collar about something so relatively average.
 
Crosscheck said:
How did you feel about the mosque they wanted next to the 9-11 center?

It was an entirely different group of Muslims who wanted it built. It was probably their right to build it right there but just not the way to go, at least to me.
Click to expand...

Would you feel differently if you knew that a mosque was lost in the World Trade Center? Do you believe that it would be inappropriate for Norwegians to build a church on the island where Brevik slaughtered all those people, because Brevik claims to be Christian?

This is America. Religious freedom is paramount, it's what the country was founded upon. All religions, not just one. Muslims had every right to build a mosque anywhere they wished. After all, dozens of Muslims died on 9/11 when their other mosque was destroyed.
 
Goshin said:
That didn't make a lot of sense... perhaps you could have worded it a bit more clearly.

Of course "all people" are not scumbags. Nor are just the ones who shoot people scumbags... I have a much broader definition of scumbag than that. :lol:

Yes, some people knew that the Giffords' shooter was probably nuts.... unfortunately, it wasn't brought to the attention of the authorities by them in a timely manner. The shooter was never involuntarily committed or declared mentally incompetent or otherwise "caught by the system" prior to the shooting. It's an imperfect world, **** happens sometimes.
Click to expand...
Thx for your reply. It was just a question about crazy people, some think they are all scumbags, but apparently you don’t.

It is clear from your reply that you value the right to bear arms highly and I see that as a rational position. I’ve always read it differently, that one must be a member of some government based militia, not an army just a local government militia would be enough, in order to bear arms. This just to reduce the “****” that happens as you stated.

I’ve had a gun, loaded pistol, aimed at me by someone that had committed a crime against our property that I had caught in the act. He wouldn’t have qualified as a militia member as he was crazy, but he did qualify for a short time in jail. This may have affected my POV.
 
haymarket said:
That is ridiculous. Guns are for firing bullets and cars are for driving as a transportation vehicle.
Click to expand...

Unless your confessing to your equivocation: a gun can't be a murder machine if it's only about firing bullets. Guns would be bullet machines, and it is the bullet which you would accuse of being the murder machine.

Either way, it's not the gun.

I have the convenience of even giving you the point, and the bullets are still killing machines, not murder machines, because bullets are designed and made for lawful use.
 
haymarket said:
Who died and made you the judge of how something should be handled? If you don't like my approach, report it to the mods and let them do their job.

WOW!!!! that felt good!!!! Hey Dianna - nice approach and thanks for the modeling. ;) I never would have thought to get all worked up and hot under the collar about something so relatively average.
Click to expand...

u-mad bro?
 
Jerry said:
[...] Firearms, pistols in particular, along with my issued military service weapons, are produced for lawful use.

They are not produced for criminal activity. Therefore, using a firearm to murder is an abuse of that weapon, inconsistent with that weapon's purpose and design. [...]
Click to expand...
Firearms are produced to kill living things. I don't know why what I'll presume is the right is running away from that undeniable fact. 99.9% of all things in existence are not produced for criminal activity, rendering your argument absurd (note: that figure is an approximation ;) ). All the wing-flapping about murder is irrelevant; if a firearm is used to murder, then it is fulfilling its design goal -- killing something.

Unless, your argument that killing things is inconsistent with the purpose and design of a firearm. If that is the case, then can you explain the need to propel a 165 grain bullet at a velocity of 900 feet per second in order to damage a tin can or a piece of cardboard? Would not a BB gun serve the same purposes, at least at short distances?

The point of the OP, if I may be so bold and if I may return to the original premise of the thread, is that a hi-capacity pistol is a rather odd thing for a political party to be raffling off in order to raise funds, especially in the district where a Congresswoman was recently shot with the same brand and style of firearm. The OP has a valid point. Instead of equivocating on the use of a firearm I would have expected the 2nd Amendmentists to simply champion the right to keep and bear arms regardless of who is doing the trafficking of the weapon (in this case, the local GOP), as long as it is legal. Instead, given all the apologist posts out there on this issue (apologizing for the uses of firearms and trying to equate them as harmless), I get the impression of cognitive dissonance (knowing that the act is wrong, but trying to legitimize it with various illogical rationale).

As was noted earlier, this is likely an intentional provocation by the local GOP. Otherwise they are rather dense (and I doubt that is the case).
 
OhIsee.Then said:
Nope, an Austrian made Glock. The AZ repubs are into high quality stuff ya know.
Click to expand...

SW MP is a better weapon than a glock. I took one of the first available to a training facility frequented by David Bowie-an expert gunsmith in modifying plastic frame guns. The next year all the staff were using SW's rather than glocks

Look up his work, its BowieTacticalConcepts.com I think
 
Karl said:
Firearms are produced to kill living things. I don't know why what I'll presume is the right is running away from that undeniable fact. 99.9% of all things in existence are not produced for criminal activity, rendering your argument absurd (note: that figure is an approximation ;) ). All the wing-flapping about murder is irrelevant; if a firearm is used to murder, then it is fulfilling its design goal -- killing something.

Unless, your argument that killing things is inconsistent with the purpose and design of a firearm. If that is the case, then can you explain the need to propel a 165 grain bullet at a velocity of 900 feet per second in order to damage a tin can or a piece of cardboard? Would not a BB gun serve the same purposes, at least at short distances?

The point of the OP, if I may be so bold and if I may return to the original premise of the thread, is that a hi-capacity pistol is a rather odd thing for a political party to be raffling off in order to raise funds, especially in the district where a Congresswoman was recently shot with the same brand and style of firearm. The OP has a valid point. Instead of equivocating on the use of a firearm I would have expected the 2nd Amendmentists to simply champion the right to keep and bear arms regardless of who is doing the trafficking of the weapon (in this case, the local GOP), as long as it is legal. Instead, given all the apologist posts out there on this issue (apologizing for the uses of firearms and trying to equate them as harmless), I get the impression of cognitive dissonance (knowing that the act is wrong, but trying to legitimize it with various illogical rationale).

As was noted earlier, this is likely an intentional provocation by the local GOP. Otherwise they are rather dense (and I doubt that is the case).
Click to expand...

First you are wrong. most firearms I own are designed for shooting at targets. Secondly, there is nothing wrong with shooting people as long as the proper scumbags get shot.

Communists hate armed citizens since armed citizens are a prophylactic against the scourge of communism
 
Raffle: I dont think there's anything wrong with a gun raffle. Just not right now. Whether it was meant to be harmful is irrelevant. It's insensitive.
This is about having respect and empathy for other human beings-it's about everyone who died that day and their families as much as it is about Gabby and hers. This is not an attack on you, guns or gun rights. Stop using this as one more thing to fight about and be human for a moment


As to the Mosque and Muslims: There wasnt all this concern with Muslims being "terrorist", as a whole, when we sent our young American Men and Women to die so that a nation of "Islamic terrorist Muslims" could live in a democracy. I dont see how Muslims were good for American blood but not good enough to have a Mosque close to ground zero - or not good enough to hold any public office in the United States?
No one seemed too concerned when Republican President George W. Bush had Saudi Prince Abdullah over to his personal home in TX for a family dinner. Abdullah was named one of the worlds top 500 most influential Muslims in the world, twice. Nor did anyone seem to care when Bush announced on national TV that Muslims were Peaceful people. Where was the uproar then?

From a Christian perspective, Jesus would have "walked in love" with Muslims "kneeling with them in prayer" and "feeding them living water".
He would have never lived in constant suspect or fear.. and He would have commanded His followers to "love your enemy/neighbor as you love yourself" and to "fear not" because He "is with you"

I'm not suggesting you shouldnt be concerned with Religious rule... It all makes me nervous, and I'm more concerned with Christian rule than I am Islamic rule at this point, but my point is: Christians can do all things through Christ. So use Christ the RIGHT way and LOVE people.

The difference between Juddaism, Islam and Christianity is Jesus being the Messiah(or not), but in the name of Jesus, Christians degrade people and call it love. It's safe to say that ALL three Religions prove GOD to be the greatest Domestic Violence Abuser of all.

Christians shouldn't work so HARD to hate people that they forget how to love.
 
Last edited:
Goshin said:
Let's turn this around a bit. Let's say that about half a year ago, in a certain town, there was an incident where a driver ran a 1968 Ford Mustang into a crowd and killed several people. Now, half a year later, some organization has a raffle and the object of the raffle is a brand new 2011 Ford F350 truck, donated by a local dealership. Should people be incensed that someone is raffling off a Ford, the same make of vehicle that was used in the mass-runover? Even though it is a different model and type of vehicle and the incident happened several months ago? Just because it is a "Ford" brand vehicle?

That's about how much the one has to do with the other.
Click to expand...

Not quite a fair comparison. Anyone who isn't blind can immediately see the difference between a 1968 mustang and a 2011 Ford F350. A lot fewer people could pick out the difference between two different glocks. Hell, I own several guns now, go shooting regularly, and have shot a couple different glocks, and I'm not sure I could tell you the difference between two different glocks just by knowing the model name or seeing a picture.

The GOP could have avoided this whole mess by auctioning off a Springfield XDM instead, and it's a better gun to boot. :mrgreen:
 
It just happens that they are raffling the same "TYPE" gun that was used in the Gifford's shooting. We must remember that the gun they are raffling is not the SAME gun used in the shooting, let's remember that the individual did it and not the gun, guns don't fire by themselves. It just happens that this particular gun is very popular.
 
Henrin said:
They are making that abundantly clear with all this "guns are for killing" talk.
Click to expand...
I know these lefties. They no more care about Gifford than the worts on their asses.
 
SeattleRain said:
Raffle: I dont think there's anything wrong with a gun raffle. Just not right now. Whether it was meant to be harmful is irrelevant. It's insensitive.
This is about having respect and empathy for other human beings-it's about everyone who died that day and their families as much as it is about Gabby and hers. This is not an attack on you, guns or gun rights. Stop using this as one more thing to fight about and be human for a moment


As to the Mosque and Muslims: There wasnt all this concern with Muslims being "terrorist", as a whole, when we sent our young American Men and Women to die so that a nation of "Islamic terrorist Muslims" could live in a democracy. I dont see how Muslims were good for American blood but not good enough to have a Mosque close to ground zero - or not good enough to hold any public office in the United States?
No one seemed too concerned when Republican President George W. Bush had Saudi Prince Abdullah over to his personal home in TX for a family dinner. Abdullah was named one of the worlds top 500 most influential Muslims in the world, twice. Nor did anyone seem to care when Bush announced on national TV that Muslims were Peaceful people. Where was the uproar then?

From a Christian perspective, Jesus would have "walked in love" with Muslims "kneeling with them in prayer" and "feeding them living water".
He would have never lived in constant suspect or fear.. and He would have commanded His followers to "love your enemy/neighbor as you love yourself" and to "fear not" because He "is with you"

I'm not suggesting you shouldnt be concerned with Religious rule... It all makes me nervous, and I'm more concerned with Christian rule than I am Islamic rule at this point, but my point is: Christians can do all things through Christ. So use Christ the RIGHT way and LOVE people.

The difference between Juddaism, Islam and Christianity is Jesus being the Messiah(or not), but in the name of Jesus, Christians degrade people and call it love. It's safe to say that ALL three Religions prove GOD to be the greatest Domestic Violence Abuser of all.

Christians shouldn't work so HARD to hate people that they forget how to love.
Click to expand...
We have a drive-by.
 
Jerry said:
Unless your confessing to your equivocation: a gun can't be a murder machine if it's only about firing bullets. Guns would be bullet machines, and it is the bullet which you would accuse of being the murder machine.

Either way, it's not the gun.

.
Click to expand...

I really do not have the slightest idea of what you are talking about or what your point is.

Perhaps that is because I do not prostrate myself before the altar that you do.
 
My only objection to this is I can't get in on it. I would be willing to spend some cash to win a .40 cal. now if it was weak 9mm I might object, but a .40 cal. has knock down power that counts.

Everyone should should have serious home protection. I don't care how good your local police are they are, and you call them at the fisrt sign of trouble they will get there just in time to file a report on what happened to you and your's while you were waiting for their help.
 
Karl said:
Firearms are produced to kill living things. I don't know why what I'll presume is the right is running away from that undeniable fact. 99.9% of all things in existence are not produced for criminal activity, rendering your argument absurd (note: that figure is an approximation ;) ). All the wing-flapping about murder is irrelevant; if a firearm is used to murder, then it is fulfilling its design goal -- killing something.
Click to expand...

If a firearm is used to murder, then is was not used to kill, it was used to murder.

If a woman has a lawful abortion, then she did not murder the unborn, she killed it.

Firearms, like medical tools unique to the abortive procedure, are designed and created for lawful use. Murder is unlawful, and is therefore an abuse.

Karl said:
Unless, your argument that killing things is inconsistent with the purpose and design of a firearm. If that is the case, then can you explain the need to propel a 165 grain bullet at a velocity of 900 feet per second in order to damage a tin can or a piece of cardboard? Would not a BB gun serve the same purposes, at least at short distances?
Click to expand...

No you got it. Firearms are designed to kill.

Kill, not murder. Kill. It's "shoot to kill", not "shoot to murder".

Karl said:
The point of the OP, if I may be so bold and if I may return to the original premise of the thread, is that a hi-capacity pistol is a rather odd thing for a political party to be raffling off in order to raise funds, especially in the district where a Congresswoman was recently shot with the same brand and style of firearm.
Click to expand...

1: it's not an odd thing to raffle if it's something people would buy tickets for a chance to get.
2: The shooting was an illegal act, and as such is divorced in every way whatsoever from the lawful possession and use of a firearm, regardless.

Karl said:
As was noted earlier, this is likely an intentional provocation by the local GOP. Otherwise they are rather dense (and I doubt that is the case).
Click to expand...

Advice I would give my best friend: When it comes to politics, never take anything at face value.

Look at what great media coverage the item being raffled has generated. How much more money by choosing this item and this location over other options. I suspect the core motive here was to generate money for through the raffle, and the exact item chosen was not but a marketing tool for free advertising the Left couldn't help themselves but provide.

So, thank you, Liberals, for once again being a tool of the GOP. You got played, bad.
 
Last edited:
SeattleRain said:
Raffle: I dont think there's anything wrong with a gun raffle. Just not right now. Whether it was meant to be harmful is irrelevant. It's insensitive.
This is about having respect and empathy for other human beings-it's about everyone who died that day and their families as much as it is about Gabby and hers. This is not an attack on you, guns or gun rights. Stop using this as one more thing to fight about and be human for a moment
Click to expand...


The Congresswoman has even returned to work, casting a vote, so the delicate time to mind sensitivity has passed.

Yes it's time for you people to stop being hyper-sensitive. It's clinically unhealthy, and one of many ways Liberalism is a mental disorder.
 
Red Crow said:
It just happens that they are raffling the same "TYPE" gun that was used in the Gifford's shooting. We must remember that the gun they are raffling is not the SAME gun used in the shooting, let's remember that the individual did it and not the gun, guns don't fire by themselves. It just happens that this particular gun is very popular.
Click to expand...

I bet some of the folks operating the raffle were the same race as the shooter, too. HOW INSENSITIVE!!!
 
Jerry said:
I bet some of the folks operating the raffle were the same race as the shooter, too. HOW INSENSITIVE!!!
Click to expand...

And you think this sort of extremist gloating and wise guy routine does exactly what for your credibility?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom