• 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!

Guns

What do you think gun control should be like?

  • Let everyone have a gun

    Votes: 19 22.4%
  • Quick background check to purchase and carry

    Votes: 25 29.4%
  • Quick background check to purchase, but more difficult to carry

    Votes: 11 12.9%
  • Background check, waiting period for purchase and carrying.

    Votes: 17 20.0%
  • Background check, waiting period, no carrying

    Votes: 5 5.9%
  • No guns at all

    Votes: 8 9.4%

  • Total voters
    85
Status
Not open for further replies.
Children in school aren't yet of legal age to own firearms.
As for showing signs, if someone notices these signs, and doesn't report them, why would that person be restricted from buying a gun legally? If they did report those signs, then the psychiatric and legal system would have to intervene in such circumstances. Until the individual has committed a felony, or otherwise been barred legally from his constitutional rights, these are just hypotheticals.

What about Universities? This does hold pretty well true for mass shooters as well.

But let's think about this for a second. You are saying these people shouldn't be barred because they haven't been found to be a danger to themselves or others? Obviously. You can't restrict a right based upon nothing. This isn't Iran. But if probable cause is found, then you should restrict the right.

I guess what I am getting at is I don't really understand your position. Are you against guns because some people slip through the system? Because if that is the case, well that isn't right. People rarely slip through the system, but more importantly the act of any form of ban is not really the answer to people who are dangerous to themselves or others. The answer is awareness and educating the public.
 
But let's think about this for a second. You are saying these people shouldn't be barred because they haven't been found to be a danger to themselves or others? Obviously. You can't restrict a right based upon nothing. This isn't Iran. But if probable cause is found, then you should restrict the right.

Innocent until proven guilty.

I guess what I am getting at is I don't really understand your position. Are you against guns because some people slip through the system? Because if that is the case, well that isn't right. People rarely slip through the system, but more importantly the act of any form of ban is not really the answer to people who are dangerous to themselves or others. The answer is awareness and educating the public.

Where did you get the impression I am against guns at all? I'm likely one of the most pro-gun rights advocates on the entire site.
 
Last edited:
Because a rape victim won't need the abortion your party wants to provide at tax-payer expence and thuse need to rely on the governement and vote Democrat, if she just shoots the rapist dead.

1) A rapist can be shot just as dead with a rifle or a shotgun as with a handgun.

2) I'm pretty sure a woman carrying a rifle or a shotgun out in the open is much more of a deterrent than a woman who weas a handgun on the hip, especially if it is concealed.

3) If there are that many rapes occurring in an area then the people can use referendum to change the law so they can carry handguns.
 
no, they cannot. if I say chocolate is better than vanilla, I cannot be wrong, as its purely subjective & dependent upon my personal taste.

you were already given examples of "wrong" opinions.
 
there is no such thing as a truly "wrong" opinion.

opinions, by their very nature, cannot be wrong..or right.

An opinion is a personal view, those can be wrong if they conflict with measured data. Like young earth creationism.
 
1) A rapist can be shot just as dead with a rifle or a shotgun as with a handgun.

2) I'm pretty sure a woman carrying a rifle or a shotgun out in the open is much more of a deterrent than a woman who weas a handgun on the hip, especially if it is concealed.

3) If there are that many rapes occurring in an area then the people can use referendum to change the law so they can carry handguns.


Generally speaking, long guns (rifles, shotguns) are better than handguns at almost everything, except certain specialized applications...

1. Close-quarters combat
2. Concealment
3. Handiness, lightness, ease of carry and use.


It's hard enough to get a woman to carry a little automatic, I sure don't see them lugging around shotguns and rifles to go shopping.
 
An opinion is a personal view, those can be wrong if they conflict with measured data. Like young earth creationism.

opinions concerning facts, aren't actually opinions.

if someone says "in my opinion, the Earth is flat", they aren't actually stating an opinion, but a misconception of science.
 
What a bunch of nuts we have here...
"let everyone have a gun...implied no regulation".....33% !!
Your so-called freedoms and liberties are more important than the welfare of society...
And imagine if madmen such as I were to be a gun-owner.....freedoms and liberties....down the drain !
 
What a bunch of nuts we have here...
"let everyone have a gun...implied no regulation".....33% !!
Your so-called freedoms and liberties are more important than the welfare of society...
And imagine if madmen such as I were to be a gun-owner.....freedoms and liberties....down the drain !
if every man, woman, and child in this country had a gun, there would be a ****load of dangerous folks with guns.

clearly, we need some common sense regulations upon gun ownership and the ability to carry them.
 
opinions concerning facts, aren't actually opinions.

if someone says "in my opinion, the Earth is flat", they aren't actually stating an opinion, but a misconception of science.

But as a personal view, that does count as an opinion.
 
What a bunch of nuts we have here...
"let everyone have a gun...implied no regulation".....33% !!
Your so-called freedoms and liberties are more important than the welfare of society...
And imagine if madmen such as I were to be a gun-owner.....freedoms and liberties....down the drain !

Earthworms don't kill people...
 
1) A rapist can be shot just as dead with a rifle or a shotgun as with a handgun.

2) I'm pretty sure a woman carrying a rifle or a shotgun out in the open is much more of a deterrent than a woman who weas a handgun on the hip, especially if it is concealed.

3) If there are that many rapes occurring in an area then the people can use referendum to change the law so they can carry handguns.

I'm not sure what your position is but come on man. Do you expect people to just casually carry rifles and shotguns through the streets? And you say it yourself a rifle or shotgun can kill someone just as easily as a shotgun or rifle so why would anyone carry something bigger and heavier?
 
But as a personal view, that does count as an opinion.

its a misuse of the term "opinion".

true opinions, cannot be right or wrong. they are 100% subjective, and depend upon the personal views of the owner.
 
Generally speaking, long guns (rifles, shotguns) are better than handguns at almost everything, except certain specialized applications...

1. Close-quarters combat
2. Concealment
3. Handiness, lightness, ease of carry and use.


It's hard enough to get a woman to carry a little automatic, I sure don't see them lugging around shotguns and rifles to go shopping.

My wife is a petite, sexy blonde, with enhancements...I can in no way see her handling a .22 rifle let alone any shotgun. Thus (as a nurse), she carries a 038 pistol, and a tazer....I am less worried, and don't need to worry about prison, as much.
 
its a misuse of the term "opinion".

true opinions, cannot be right or wrong. they are 100% subjective, and depend upon the personal views of the owner.

No, that's only one definition of an opinion. An opinion surely can be a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. However, it is also defined as a personal view, attitude, or appraisal. It can also mean a professional judgement as well. Opinions are rather subjective, but some could have statements which conflict with measured reality. Those are wrong opinions.
 
if every man, woman, and child in this country had a gun, there would be a ****load of dangerous folks with guns.

clearly, we need some common sense regulations upon gun ownership and the ability to carry them.


The problem with that phrase is some of you think it means crazy crap like useless waiting periods, perpetual licensing just to own, unreasonable legal hurdles and paperwork and abuseable requirements; removing someone's rights for minor mental issues like stress or minor PTSD, and similar crap....
 
The problem with that phrase is some of you think it means crazy crap like useless waiting periods, perpetual licensing just to own, unreasonable legal hurdles and paperwork and abuseable requirements; removing someone's rights for minor mental issues like stress or minor PTSD, and similar crap....

i see no need for waiting periods if background checks can be done within 30 minutes.

taking away gun rights from folks who suffer from stress? is this a strawman?

show me one person in the Northwestern hemisphere who has no stress.
 
i see no need for waiting periods if background checks can be done within 30 minutes.

taking away gun rights from folks who suffer from stress? is this a strawman?

show me one person in the Northwestern hemisphere who has no stress.


No strawman. We've had issues with veterans losing rights over PTSD, and heard people (wasn't that YOU?) call for all gun owners to submit to a mental-health test before being allowed to buy a gun.

Problem with mental-health issues is it is somewhat subjective, not an exact science, and too easily abused by anti's.
 
My feelings on gun control can't be accurately summed up by those short statements.

I believe that in order to purchase guns, one should have to be able to demonstrate that they know basic gun laws and safety rules. Once you demonstrate that, then it should be an easy process. Just an instant background check and off you go. The requirements to carry in public should be a bit stricter, and should involve proving basic proficiency with your weapon on a shooting range, and knowledge of laws on when it is and is not legal to use your weapon.
 
My feelings on gun control can't be accurately summed up by those short statements.

I believe that in order to purchase guns, one should have to be able to demonstrate that they know basic gun laws and safety rules. Once you demonstrate that, then it should be an easy process. Just an instant background check and off you go. The requirements to carry in public should be a bit stricter, and should involve proving basic proficiency with your weapon on a shooting range, and knowledge of laws on when it is and is not legal to use your weapon.

And how much would all that cost? Great to see that people see that rights should be curtailed to the point of making them functionally pointless.
 
No strawman. We've had issues with veterans losing rights over PTSD, and heard people (wasn't that YOU?) call for all gun owners to submit to a mental-health test before being allowed to buy a gun.....

did I call for folks to lose their gun rights, simply due to having stress????

no, no I did not. hence my question of your statement being a strawman.
 
I'm not sure what your position is but come on man. Do you expect people to just casually carry rifles and shotguns through the streets?

If someone wants to, why not?

If owning a firearm, including rifles and shotguns, is perfectly legal why shouldn't someone be able to carry it around on the streets if they want?

And you say it yourself a rifle or shotgun can kill someone just as easily as a shotgun or rifle so why would anyone carry something bigger and heavier?

Because it's bigger and heavier and thus more noticeable. If you want to defend yourself then wielding a rifle or shotgun makes everyone know that you're capable of and willing to defend yourself. And it's not something criminals can really hide so they can use it in their criminal endeavors.
 
Innocent until proven guilty.

That is what probable cause is with the Baker Act. You are legally detaining someone because they are felt to be a danger to themselves or others. This is a state of Florida law, but I feel it is a good law to be anywhere (not sure what it is elsewhere).

An involuntary Baker Act is when a person is taken to a receiving facility for involuntary examination when there is reason to believe that he or she is mentally ill and because of his or her mental illness, the person has refused voluntary examination; the person is unable to determine for himself or herself whether examination is necessary and without care or treatment, the person is likely to suffer from neglect or refuse to care for himself or herself and such refusal could pose a threat of harm to his or her well being; and there is a substantial likelihood that without care or treatment, the person will cause serious bodily harm to himself, herself or others in the near future as evidenced by recent behavior.

Baker Act

And as far as teh gun thing goes...I wasn't sure of your position. I just wanted to clarify it.
 
No strawman. We've had issues with veterans losing rights over PTSD, and heard people (wasn't that YOU?) call for all gun owners to submit to a mental-health test before being allowed to buy a gun.

Problem with mental-health issues is it is somewhat subjective, not an exact science, and too easily abused by anti's.

This is all true.

But that's why I also think we need a universal mental health care system so we can provide aid to our veterans with PTSD and to those with other mental illnesses.

But that's a whole 'nother argument...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom