• 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
"Attributes in assault weapon definitions

Attributes previously defined in assault weapon legislation and their purposes
Detachable magazines[citation needed]
Collapsible stocks allow for adjustment to the length of pull.
Folding stocks[citation needed]
Pistol grips (on rifles) reduce the angle (and thus rotational strain) of the wrist.
Bayonet mounts are often on civilian firearms due to the same parts being used on both government and civilian rifles [4]
Flash suppressors shield the shooter's vision, as well as those beside or behind the user.[10]
Threaded barrels mount flash suppressors, compensators and muzzle brakes both used for aiding recoil management.
Barrel mounted grenade launcher mounts are concentric rings around the muzzle.[citation needed]
A barrel shroud is a tube around the barrel designed to limit transfer of heat from the barrel to the supporting hand, or to protect a shooter from being burned by accidental contact.[11]
Magazines greater than 10 rounds [4]
Semi-automatic, functionality meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action, but (as opposed to automatic firearms) only one round is fired per pull of the trigger.[5]

Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thank you for proving my point. "Assault wrapon" is not a kind of firearm, it' just a non-functional cosmetic appearance, no different than banning cameo by labeling it "assault clothes".
 
That was the point behind Fast and Furious. The Obama regime gave weapons to drug gangs in the hopes that they could use the emotional tug of hundreds of Mexican murders to push through more gun bans.

Biden's first statements in January should be how the Obama administration is going to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Holder and Obama for their role in providing deadly weapons to Mexican gangs. After the prosecutions are completed then let's talk about disarming other dangerous politicians. Leave the citizens alone.

Yea ive heard you say this before and still waiting on some background source or any information you have, but have yet to back up this claim up at all.
 
Right. So stop coming.

Stop coming???? What does that even mean directed to me? You were the one waving goodbye only to pop up rather soon to say you are no longer participating.

here is but one example

Do you believe I will continue to play your silly game?

and you still keep playing as evidence by your latest post. So you have answered your own question strongly in the affirmative.
 
Which "petty" argument? Do you mean where I recognize that like most tyrants you want to be unencumbered while wanting restrictions on the rest of us?

Most of the free world in modern democracies have more strict restrictions on firearms than us... Are they tyrants too?
 
Why shouldn't it be easy to purchase a tool? Should I have to wait two weeks to buy a shovel or an axe? If my need to defend myself occurs this weekend why should I be compelled to be assaulted or perhaps murdered for some idiotic waiting period?

We have a right to self defense that is independent of the state. The state has no business making it impossible for me to defend myself during a waiting period nor does it have the moral right to make it very difficult for me to do so.

So you think it should be very easy to purchase a firearm? Just as easy as shopping for groceries at Walmart?
 
its because of CT that the anti gun loons
Yup "loons". Am i one of those "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
Any proof of this?
 
Nobody is asking you to "justify the value" of their choice in personal defense weapons, nor are they asking you to accept gun crime. But you must get it through your head that one is a Constitutional right while the other is a crime that deserves a stiff sentence.

The Constitution says nothing about assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We the people banned them before, and we can again.
 
Thank you for proving my point. "Assault wrapon" is not a kind of firearm, it' just a non-functional cosmetic appearance, no different than banning cameo by labeling it "assault clothes".

Glad to hear their ban will not be a hardship for you! :cool:
 
I am suggesting what actually happened, they decided the numbers were unacceptable so they acted to lower them. And I'm not suggesting here that we go the same route at this time. I think our society is probably a couple hundred years of evolution behind the UK in banning all guns.

Why do liberals and socialists always use evolution as part of their argument? What is worse is they always use it for state control of something. What makes you think that is evolution? It would seem to me your dream is not to evolve but to become unevolved.
 
Try looking up the term per capita. We have more gun homicides per capita than do other rich countries with less guns.

Try looking up the term homicide. The issue is about homicide. If you look at that per capita the USA is not much higher than Western European countries or Canada and Australia. Our gun rates are higher because we have more guns.
 
Self defence should not be limited by the weapon's appearence.

If you think appearance is the only difference you cannot claim hardship by its ban. Good point Jerry!
 
No, I don't find it compelling, as other industrialized nations don't have the same diversity and cultural differences that we have.

What Country are you basing that claim on? Remember it is around 80% of Americans that do not own passports. Who are the 'cultured' and who are the not so cultured?

Over 80% of gun-related violence is committed with illegally owned/obtained weapons. It's not the legal gun owner who is causing the problem

With having around 300 million legally owned guns in America, do you seriously think your criminal fraternity are going to ply their trade unarmed? Most other advanced industrial nations, gun crime is generally confined to criminal-on-criminal activity (even this is few in comparison).

Paul
 
The Constitution says nothing about assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We the people banned them before, and we can again.

Not really as the last ban had no impact on existing arms, it simply made the new ones sold look a bit different. Like banning "big" (over 16 oz.) soda pop servings, one can simply tape two 10-round magazines together and quickly flip them, or get (or make) "black market" magazines. Those willing to commit violent crimes with guns are likely none too worried about obeying some new "tool" laws.
 
What Country are you basing that claim on? Remember it is around 80% of Americans that do not own passports. Who are the 'cultured' and who are the not so cultured?



With having around 300 million legally owned guns in America, do you seriously think your criminal fraternity are going to ply their trade unarmed? Most other advanced industrial nations, gun crime is generally confined to criminal-on-criminal activity (even this is few in comparison).

Paul


What I find ballsy is someone from Canada where these guns and magazines are illegal trying to convince Americans that they shouldn't also be illegal here.
 

Then you agree that guns are not the issue and that humans and their desire to kill is... good to know.

What I find ballsy is someone from Canada where these guns and magazines are illegal trying to convince Americans that they shouldn't also be illegal here.

Isn't he from England?
 
Not really as the last ban had no impact on existing arms, it simply made the new ones sold look a bit different. Like banning "big" (over 16 oz.) soda pop servings, one can simply tape two 10-round magazines together and quickly flip them, or get (or make) "black market" magazines. Those willing to commit violent crimes with guns are likely none too worried about obeying some new "tool" laws.

The previous ban wasn't long enough to significantly reduce the number of these guns out there, and this time other measures are also being proposed, like finally closing the private sales loophole that allows guns to be purchased without a background check and waiting period.

Glad to hear thought that this ban will be no hardship for fellows like you who believe there is no advantage in assault weapons and high capacity mags!
 
Then you agree that guns are not the issue and that humans and their desire to kill is... good to know.

I do not agree, as no other rich nation has as many homicides as the US does with guns.



Isn't he from England?

Lizzie says she lives in Canada.
 
I do not agree, as no other rich nation has as many homicides as the US does with guns.





Lizzie says she lives in Canada.

Word smith much? England has more crumpets and scones therefore their obesity is greater when it comes to scone and crumpet consumption.
 
I do not agree, as no other rich nation has as many homicides as the US does with guns.





Lizzie says she lives in Canada.

OK. We disagree...
 
The previous ban wasn't long enough to significantly reduce the number of these guns out there, and this time other measures are also being proposed, like finally closing the private sales loophole that allows guns to be purchased without a background check and waiting period.

Glad to hear thought that this ban will be no hardship for fellows like you who believe there is no advantage in assault weapons and high capacity mags!

As long as replacements are offered free of charge, i.e. trade two 15-round magazines for a three 10-round magazines, or allow them to be grandfathered in, I have no problem with it. The problem occurs with offering no "fair market" funds for the "taking" of private legally owned private property.
 
But you're missing the whole point. In many of these cases, the Supreme Court is basically inventing new application out of whole cloth because what came before simply does not apply in any way, shape or form to new technologies, new ideas, etc. It's not a matter of deciding what the founding fathers intended, they didn't intend anything, they couldn't have imagined these things in their wildest dreams, it's just making up new ideas and trying to shoehorn them into the writings of people who died almost 250 years ago. I seriously doubt they intended their ideas to be the only driving force for the nation for centuries to come, nor could they have foreseen the kind of polarization that's come to pass that makes ratifying any new ideas into the Constitution basically impossible.

But they certainly would understand the concept that "we the people" should be able to have the best option for self defense an hunting. I am also willing to bet that they would have been ok with cannons, especially for merchants who come under piracy threat.

Of course we take that with some reasonable thought and restrict heavy artillery and explosives. But I don't think they would be opposed to a civilian population being able to arm themselves the same as a standard I infantrymen.
 
As long as replacements are offered free of charge, i.e. trade two 15-round magazines for a three 10-round magazines, or allow them to be grandfathered in, I have no problem with it. The problem occurs with offering no "fair market" funds for the "taking" of private legally owned private property.

I have heard of no proposal to take guns already purchased by law abiding citizens. Some localities have instituted buy back programs.
 
Back
Top Bottom