• 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!

Gun Control

Would you support more restrictions on guns if they had the potential to save lives?

  • Yes

    Votes: 59 39.9%

  • No

    Votes: 74 50.0%

  • Others

    Votes: 15 10.1%
  • Total voters
    148
TheDemSocialist said:
Is this debate only narrowed down to Connecticut?
Click to expand...

its because of CT that the anti gun loons have come out of the clouds. IN reality, Obumble, Biden and their toadies were planning on trying to ban guns all along once Obumble won the election
 
More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?
"America now has 300 million firearms, a barrage of NRA-backed gun laws—and record casualties from mass killers."

"In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 62 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public. And in other recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed."

More Guns, More Mass Shootings
 
Catawba said:
More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?
"America now has 300 million firearms, a barrage of NRA-backed gun laws—and record casualties from mass killers."

"In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 62 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public. And in other recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed."

More Guns, More Mass Shootings
Click to expand...

MOther Jones-complete crap and you know it. there was a lady in a church who fired on an active shooter and he was wounded and killed himself. Nice try, but MJ is full of fertilizer of the bovine kind. and Charles Whitman Jr was pinned down by citizens with telescoping rifles who allowed another Non LEO civilian and a texas ranger to get to the shooter and kill him
 
TurtleDude said:
its because of CT that the anti gun loons have come out of the clouds. IN reality, Obumble, Biden and their toadies were planning on trying to ban guns all along once Obumble won the election
Click to expand...

Sure they were you really know how Obama thinks deep down inside right? :roll:
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Sure they were you really know how Obama thinks deep down inside right? :roll:
Click to expand...

Well, it is the stance that leftists take. Gun control and gun bans. So it wouldn't really be a big surprise. All politicians want to make their base happy after all, right?
 
TurtleDude said:
MOther Jones-complete crap and you know it. there was a lady in a church who fired on an active shooter and he was wounded and killed himself. Nice try, but MJ is full of fertilizer of the bovine kind. and Charles Whitman Jr was pinned down by citizens with telescoping rifles who allowed another Non LEO civilian and a texas ranger to get to the shooter and kill him
Click to expand...

I'll give you an opportunity to prove your claim. Show me evidence of how many of the 67 mass shootings in the last 30 years where the shooter was taken out by civilian using a gun?
 
Catawba said:
I'll give you an opportunity to prove your claim. Show me evidence of how many of the 67 mass shootings in the last 30 years where the shooter was taken out by civilian using a gun?
Click to expand...

why don't you explain why so many of those mass shootings were perpetrated in areas where the killers had a reasonable belief that there were no armed individuals present?
 
TurtleDude said:
why don't you explain why so many of those mass shootings were perpetrated in areas where the killers had a reasonable belief that there were no armed individuals present?
Click to expand...


So you Mother Earth had it right, thanks for your admission that you were wrong about any of the shooters being taken out by a civilian with a gun. Now you want to make another claim you have no evidence of? How about you post your evidence and then we'll take a look at it?
 
Catawba said:
More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?
"America now has 300 million firearms, a barrage of NRA-backed gun laws—and record casualties from mass killers."

"In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 62 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public. And in other recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed."

More Guns, More Mass Shootings
Click to expand...

We have a bigger population. More people... more shootings. Makes sense when you think about it. Is that the problem... the thinking?

I'll give you an opportunity to prove your claim. Show me evidence of how many of the 67 mass shootings in the last 30 years where the shooter was taken out by civilian using a gun?
Click to expand...

That is the problem. The murderers went to areas known to have no guns... schools and such. Your argument would have merit if, and only if, you could disprove the cases where a rapist, home intruder or potential murderer was stopped by a gun owner. We know that there are MANY examples of that.

Run your foolishness along already...
 
Catawba said:
I'll give you an opportunity to prove your claim. Show me evidence of how many of the 67 mass shootings in the last 30 years where the shooter was taken out by civilian using a gun?
Click to expand...

In a related Weekly Standard article, as a commentary on the MJ article:
(point being- if there's an armed civilian, it's not nearly as likely to be a mass shooting)




There are a couple of major problems here with arguing that armed civilians don't stop mass shootings. One is that when armed civilians are present, they often stop mass shootings before they can become mass shootings. One of the criteria Mother Jones used to define mass shootings is that "the shooter took the lives of at least four people." So then, consider the followingMayan Palace Theater, San Antonio, Texas, this week: Jesus Manuel Garcia shoots at a movie theater, a police car and bystanders from the nearby China Garden restaurant; as he enters the movie theater, guns blazing, an armed off-duty cop shoots Garcia four times, stopping the attack. Total dead: Zero.

– Winnemucca, Nev., 2008: Ernesto Villagomez opens fire in a crowded restaurant; concealed carry permit-holder shoots him dead. Total dead: Two. (I’m excluding the shooters’ deaths in these examples.)

– Appalachian School of Law, 2002: Crazed immigrant shoots the dean and a professor, then begins shooting students; as he goes for more ammunition, two armed students point their guns at him, allowing a third to tackle him. Total dead: Three.

– Santee, Calif., 2001: Student begins shooting his classmates — as well as the “trained campus supervisor”; an off-duty cop who happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day points his gun at the shooter, holding him until more police arrive. Total dead: Two.

– Pearl High School, Mississippi, 1997: After shooting several people at his high school, student heads for the junior high school; assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieves a .45 pistol from his car and points it at the gunman’s head, ending the murder spree. Total dead: Two.

– Edinboro, Pa., 1998: A student shoots up a junior high school dance being held at a restaurant; restaurant owner pulls out his shotgun and stops the gunman. Total dead: One.
These are just a few examples of mass shootings being prevented. I'm sure there are many more that meet this criteria. But, as you can see, in every incident, the would-be shooters were stopped short of killing four people because an armed civilian—or in some cases, an off duty cop—was present.
Click to expand...
 
Catawba said:
I'll give you an opportunity to prove your claim. Show me evidence of how many of the 67 mass shootings in the last 30 years where the shooter was taken out by civilian using a gun?
Click to expand...

Generally the cops get there first and take over... next.
 
Catawba said:
So you Mother Earth had it right, thanks for your admission that you were wrong about any of the shooters being taken out by a civilian with a gun. Now you want to make another claim you have no evidence of? How about you post your evidence and then we'll take a look at it?
Click to expand...

your dishonest interpretations of other people's posts are well known

but your claim is both irrelevant and stupid.

killers target areas where gun possession is banned

they don't target areas where people are packing guns

that proves our point far more than you can understand

guns possessed by law abiding citizens deter crime

that is why almost every mass shooting of record was in gun free zones
 
lizzie said:
In a related Weekly Standard article, as a commentary on the MJ article:
(point being- if there's an armed civilian, it's not nearly as likely to be a mass shooting)
Click to expand...

Well done...
 
lizzie said:
In a related Weekly Standard article, as a commentary on the MJ article:
(point being- if there's an armed civilian, it's not nearly as likely to be a mass shooting)
Click to expand...

HOLY FACT SLAP BATMAN!!:mrgreen:
 
someone just got PWNED big time!!
 
Catawba said:
More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?
"America now has 300 million firearms, a barrage of NRA-backed gun laws—and record casualties from mass killers."

"In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 62 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public. And in other recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed."

More Guns, More Mass Shootings
Click to expand...

Stop school shootings by letting teachers fire back, say Texas officials | Fox News

Want to bet no one tries a mass shooting at that school?

I see you still haven't answered my question about other means of preventing the attacks, you just keep going with the same old, same old, get rid of guns fantasy. Getting rid of guns in American society is impossible at this time and probably will be for a long time to come.

You could come up with 10 million arguments, but it doesn't change the facts.

1. Currently, gun ownership is a protected right defined by the constitution and a new amendment any time soon is not likely to pass
2. Millions of people own guns, like owning guns and will refuse to give them up
3. More gun ownership and unrestricted right to self defense and defense of others is the only thing that history shows us will significantly lower murder rates and by association, probably other violent crimes.
4. The founding fathers envisioned the militia, by their own laws when they had control, meaning all adult males were the reserve and the final line of defense. Other than dropping the militia requirement, all other factors still apply. And they did not envision that final line to be armed with anything less than the first line was, the final line only had to pay for it themselves instead of it being issued. And all American legal gun owners are still an unofficial militia.

Guns are here, they are going to be here and they are not going away, so go ahead and focus on an unobtainable fantasy, or start using you brain to come up with workable solutions.
 
lizzie said:
In a related Weekly Standard article, as a commentary on the MJ article:
(point being- if there's an armed civilian, it's not nearly as likely to be a mass shooting)
Click to expand...

And now we can add last weeks Clakamus County OR mall shooting where an armed man is reported to have stopped it from becoming a massacre. Oh wait, only two died there if I remember right.

Yep, amazing how when only look at the ones that didn't get stopped that you end up with zero being the number stopped by a gun owner. Would that be a biased study and statistics? I guess only if you are not on an anti-gun kick.
 
Bodhisattva said:
We have a bigger population. More people... more shootings. Makes sense when you think about it. Is that the problem... the thinking?
Click to expand...

Try looking up the term per capita. We have more gun homicides per capita than do other rich countries with less guns.
 
lizzie said:
In a related Weekly Standard article, as a commentary on the MJ article:
(point being- if there's an armed civilian, it's not nearly as likely to be a mass shooting)
Click to expand...

5 cases against 62 does not make A case, and those five only met one of the criteria used in the Mother Earth study.

"There is no evidence indicating that arming Americans further will help prevent mass shootings or reduce the carnage, says Dr. Stephen Hargarten, a leading expert on emergency medicine and gun violence at the Medical College of Wisconsin. To the contrary, there appears to be a relationship between the proliferation of firearms and a rise in mass shootings: By our count, there have been two per year on average since 1982. Yet 25 of the 62 cases we examined have occurred since 2006. This year alone there have already been seven mass shootings—and a record number of casualties, with more than 140 people injured and killed.

Armed civilians attempting to intervene are actually more likely to increase the bloodshed, says Hargarten, "given that civilian shooters are less likely to hit their targets than police in these circumstances." A chaotic scene in August at the Empire State Building put this starkly into perspective when New York City police officers confronting a gunman wounded nine innocent bystanders."

More Guns, More Mass Shootings
 
TurtleDude said:
killers target areas where gun possession is banned

they don't target areas where people are packing guns
Click to expand...


You have provided zero evidence that any significant number of the 62 mass shootings in the last 30 years were in places where guns were not allowed.
 
Misterveritis said:
Do you believe I will continue to play your silly game?
Click to expand...

When one quits the game, one does not return periodically to ring the bell reminding the world that they are no longer here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom