• 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!

A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

Would this compromise be acceptable?

  • Yes. This isn’t perfect, but no compromise is.

    Votes: 11 14.7%

  • No. I don’t mind some compromise, but this still takes away too much.

    Votes: 10 13.3%

  • No. We should never compromise our gun rights.

    Votes: 49 65.3%

  • No. This still gives too many gun ownership privileges.

    Votes: 3 4.0%

  • I can hit a target 400 yards away with my eyes closed.

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • Total voters
    75
Viv said:
The .223 rifle Adam Lanza's mother owned, did move.

As could any of the guns you're pointlessly banging on about.

Have you noticed they are guns? Purpose built to kill...or do you think they make coffee?
Click to expand...
Ummm...I take it you haven't read the revelations by NBC that they kinda jumped the shark there and the killer in fact used HANDGUNS and not the .223 hunting rifle...

No...they aren't used to make coffee. They are used to hunt, target shoot, sport shoot, and God forbid if needed, take a life.

Attacking the eeeeeevil mythical 'assault rifle' is an idiotic ploy engaged by idiotic ideologues that don't care about the TRUTH or the FACTS...and only care about their mindless drive to ban guns.
 
Viv said:
Allegedly.

What have these dangerous assault weapons been used for since 2004?
Click to expand...

It appears only to serve as proof, that without a criminal to use them, absolutely nothing. ;)

That is the whole point, or pointlessness, about a ban on things. Any tool is useless and harmless until someone either uses or abuses it. Gasoline can ether be used as a motor fuel or abused to aid an arsonist, all by itself, it is simply a flamable liquid without any free will to do anythng at all.
 
VanceMack said:
Ummm...I take it you haven't read the revelations by NBC that they kinda jumped the shark there and the killer in fact used HANDGUNS and not the .223 hunting rifle...
Click to expand...

Why would I read NBC? I'm a Euro. I have read here ad nauseum (as it is all distasteful how people ignore the deaths of small children in order to protect their silly gun fetish) that there is a difference in the minds of some between types of guns.

There is no difference. If you don't have a legitimate reason to use a gun, you should not have a right to own one.

No...they aren't used to make coffee. They are used to hunt, target shoot, sport shoot, and God forbid if needed, take a life.
Click to expand...

Killing then. And therefore have indisputable potential to kill innocent people should some homicidal maniac come along and it is regularly and frequently evidenced that such people have come along and will continue to emerge.

Attacking the eeeeeevil mythical 'assault rifle' is an idiotic ploy engaged by idiotic ideologues that don't care about the TRUTH or the FACTS...and only care about their mindless drive to ban guns.
Click to expand...

Pretending only certain types of weapon have potential to murder is worse. I appreciate the smart folks in US may be pushing an assault weapon law in order to insert the thin edge of the wedge and certainly there seems absolutely no legitimate reason to ever have assault weapons in existence other than perhaps the theatre of war, but a gun is a gun. Ban them all.

ttwtt78640 said:
It appears only to serve as proof, that without a criminal to use them, absolutely nothing. ;)

That is the whole point, or pointlessness, about a ban on things. Any tool is useless and harmless until someone either uses or abuses it. Gasoline can ether be used as a motor fuel or abused to aid an arsonist, all by itself, it is simply a flamable liquid without any free will to do anythng at all.
Click to expand...

That is disingenuous, but if you wish to allow those people with a legitimate business use for guns to continue to own them, by all means go ahead. The rest of you need to hand them over.
 
Viv said:
Why would I read NBC? I'm a Euro. I have read here ad nauseum (as it is all distasteful how people ignore the deaths of small children in order to protect their silly gun fetish) that there is a difference in the minds of some between types of guns.

There is no difference. If you don't have a legitimate reason to use a gun, you should not have a right to own one.



Killing then. And therefore have indisputable potential to kill innocent people should some homicidal maniac come along and it is regularly and frequently evidence that such people have come along.



Pretending only certain types of weapon have potential to murder is worse. I appreciate the smart folks in US may be pushing an assault weapon law in order to insert the thin edge of the wedge and certainly there seems absolutely no legitimate reason to ever have assault weapons in existence other than perhaps the theatre of war, but a gun is a gun. Ban them all.



That is disingenuous, but if you wish to allow those people with a legitimate business use for guns to continue to own them, by all means go ahead. The rest of you need to hand them over.
Click to expand...
indeed...why would you read ANYTHING that didn't support your bias?
 
VanceMack said:
indeed...why would you read ANYTHING that didn't support your bias?
Click to expand...

Do you read STV, oh unbiased one? What is their opinion on gun law?

(it seems you are totally unable to counter and blowing smoke screen as usual. This is because your bias is harming your community)
 
Last edited:
Viv said:
Do you read STV, oh unbiased one? What is their opinion on gun law?
Click to expand...

Opinions. Good. I LIKE opinions. Almost ALWAYS ideologically driven but always good for a laugh. However their OPINION is irrelevant to the FACT that the anti-gun crowd lied about what guns were used. They exploited dead children to promote an ideological cause. That is the FACTS.

That being said...DO offer a link to whatever you would like. I'm ALWAYS up for a good laugh.
 
VanceMack said:
Opinions. Good. I LIKE opinions. Almost ALWAYS ideologically driven but always good for a laugh. However their OPINION is irrelevant to the FACT that the anti-gun crowd lied about what guns were used. They exploited dead children to promote an ideological cause. That is the FACTS.

That being said...DO offer a link to whatever you would like. I'm ALWAYS up for a good laugh.
Click to expand...

Your view of the activities of your anti-gun lobby do not change what happened to those children.

Laughing is inappropriate. Selfishness is inappropriate. It's time to think of someone other than yourself.

Hopefully it will be taken out of your hands and the people who are tasked with running your country will have the balls to act and the ability to enforce.
 
Viv said:
Your view of the activities of your anti-gun lobby do not change what happened to those children.

Laughing is inappropriate. Selfishness is inappropriate. It's time to think of someone other than yourself.

Hopefully it will be taken out of your hands and the people who are tasked with running your country will have the balls to act and the ability to enforce.
Click to expand...
"So ya got no clothes..."

Yes....yessssss...promote a police state in your zeal to rid the world of assault rifles and mindlessly attempt to divert the 'cause' to the 'gun lobbies'. Run that playbook like a boss. Ignore the reality...cling to the mindless ideology.

They make good pets.
 
VanceMack said:
"So ya got no clothes..."
Click to expand...

Fully dressed, I assure you. You may feel free to respond to any one of the points (you can't counter) in the previous posts. :roll:

Yes....yessssss...promote a police state in your zeal to rid the world of assault rifles and mindlessly attempt to divert the 'cause' to the 'gun lobbies'. Run that playbook like a boss. Ignore the reality...cling to the mindless ideology.

They make good pets.
Click to expand...

In the real rest of the world, many diverse civilised peoples live without guns, far less assault rifles, and don't have any problems with Police getting into a state.

Why don't you tell me why you think it's a good idea for your metaphoric mad neighbour to have an assault rifle?
 
Viv said:
Fully dressed, I assure you. You may feel free to respond to any one of the points (you can't counter) in the previous posts. :roll:



In the real rest of the world, many diverse civilised peoples live without guns, far less assault rifles, and don't have any problems with Police getting into a state.

Why don't you tell me why you think it's a good idea for your metaphoric mad neighbour to have an assault rifle?
Click to expand...

Its a quote from a movie. Means a helluva lot more than you are naked.
I don't fear my neighbors. The facts are that more people are killed in this country every year with hammers than rifles of ANY kind. I know...that's one of those inconvenient things that gets in the way of your mindless ideology...but thems IS the facts...whether you like it or not.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
Its a quote from a movie. Means a helluva lot more than you are naked.
I don't fear my neighbors. The facts are that more people are killed in this country every year with hammers than rifles of ANY kind. I know...that's one of those inconvenient things that gets in the way of your mindless ideology...but theme IS the facts...whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...

It's a quote from a centuries old fairly tale, long before your movie and I know what it means.

The stats you refer to are inaccurate. Feel free to post them.
 
Viv said:
It's a quote from a centuries old fairly tale, long before your movie and I know what it means.

The stats you refer to are inaccurate. Feel free to post them.
Click to expand...
it was a direct quote from a movie but means very much the same as the fable. You have no clothes. You cling to a mindlessly ideological driven premise and ignore facts and reality. You cling to the idea of "lets ban the evil guns" and ignore the day to day violence. Cuz dealing with actual criminals and thugs...well...that's 'hard'. You might have to actually engage people and not just an inanimate object.

But I will accept that challenge, on only one condition. My experience is mindless ideologues ignore facts, even when asked for and received. So...on the chance that I am right and can in fact provide a source (would the compiled FBI statistics suffice?) that shows more people in the US were beaten to death than shot with a rifle, will you then admit that you are in fact a mindless ideologue driven only by a 'cause', not the facts? Simple challenge and one you should accept with confidence I think (though you might want to do a quick google search before accepting that challenge. There is POSSIBLY a reason why I made such a specific comparison). Ball is in your court.
 
Viv said:
It's a quote from a centuries old fairly tale, long before your movie and I know what it means.

The stats you refer to are inaccurate. Feel free to post them.
Click to expand...


The Volokh Conspiracy » Are Blunt Objects More Common Homicide Weapons Than Rifles?

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.... [For instance, i]n 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605....
Click to expand...
 
VanceMack said:
it was a direct quote from a movie but means very much the same as the fable. You have no clothes. You cling to a mindlessly ideological driven premise and ignore facts and reality. You cling to the idea of "lets ban the evil guns" and ignore the day to day violence. Cuz dealing with actual criminals and thugs...well...that's 'hard'. You might have to actually engage people and not just an inanimate object.
Click to expand...

You're describing your own attitudes.

Shooting people is different from dealing with them. Shooting people who may be dealt with in another way, is removing their basic rights and freedoms.

But I will accept that challenge, on only one condition. My experience is mindless ideologues ignore facts, even when asked for and received. So...on the chance that I am right and can in fact provide a source (would the compiled FBI statistics suffice?) that shows more people in the US were beaten to death than shot with a rifle, will you then admit that you are in fact a mindless ideologue driven only by a 'cause', not the facts? Simple challenge and one you should accept with confidence I think (though you might want to do a quick google search before accepting that challenge. There is POSSIBLY a reason why I made such a specific comparison). Ball is in your court.
Click to expand...

No, the FBI stats would not suffice, as I read them last week when the mad squad were posting them and found the article posted to be inaccurate. I posted stats to evidence that in a thread here. Strangely the post seems to have disappeared from my history. Which is sad for me because I cleared my cache yesterday, it is lateish here and I will now be forced to take time to relocate the stupid stats just in order to inform you.

Goshin said:
The Volokh Conspiracy » Are Blunt Objects More Common Homicide Weapons Than Rifles?
Click to expand...

Hmhhh thought it was quiet around here.

Did the word "conspiracy" go over your head? Are you posting that joke of a site as a serious source?
 
Viv said:
You're describing your own attitudes.

Shooting people is different from dealing with them. Shooting people who may be dealt with in another way, is removing their basic rights and freedoms.



No, the FBI stats would not suffice, as I read them last week when the mad squad were posting them and found the article posted to be inaccurate. I posted stats to evidence that in a thread here. Strangely the post seems to have disappeared from my history. Which is sad for me because I cleared my cache yesterday, it is lateish here and I will now be forced to take time to relocate the stupid stats just in order to inform you.



Hmhhh thought it was quiet around here.

Did the word "conspiracy" go over your head? Are you posting that joke of a site as a serious source?
Click to expand...
so thats a 'no' then.
 
Viv said:
Hmhhh thought it was quiet around here.

Did the word "conspiracy" go over your head? Are you posting that joke of a site as a serious source?
Click to expand...


The stats are listed as coming from the FBI.

But fine... here are more links for your enjoyment saying the same damn thing...

Woodhugger Engineering web logs: You Do The Math - Death By Gun vs Hammer

FBI: More Club and Hammer Homicides than Rifle - The John Birch Society

FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles"]FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles[/URL]
 
Here...to start with before I go...

Overview...
...Of the homicides for which the FBI received weapons data, most (67.5 percent) involved the use of firearms. Handguns comprised 68.5 percent of the firearms used in murders and nonnegligent manslaughters in 2010. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 8.) FBI — Expanded Homicide Data
Click to expand...

FBI — Table 20

Table 20
Murder

by State, Types of Weapons, 2011

Data Declaration
Download Excel

State Total
murders1 Total
firearms Handguns Rifles Shotguns Firearms
(type
unknown) Knives or
cutting
instruments Other
weapons Hands, fists,
feet, etc.2
Alaska 29 16 5 0 3 8 6 5 2
Arizona 339 222 165 14 9 34 49 59 9
Arkansas 153 110 52 4 6 48 22 17 4
California 1,790 1,220 866 45 50 259 261 208 101
Colorado 147 73 39 3 5 26 22 31 21
Connecticut 128 94 54 1 1 38 18 10 6
Delaware 41 28 18 0 3 7 8 2 3
District of Columbia 108 77 37 0 1 39 21 9 1
Georgia 522 370 326 16 16 12 61 83 8
Hawaii 7 1 0 1 0 0 2 1 3
Idaho 32 17 15 1 0 1 4 8 3
Illinois3 452 377 364 1 5 7 29 29 17
Indiana 284 183 115 9 12 47 36 43 22
Iowa 44 19 7 0 2 10 10 10 5
Kansas 110 73 31 3 5 34 11 16 10
Kentucky 150 100 77 6 5 12 13 24 13
Louisiana 485 402 372 10 8 12 28 29 26
Maine 25 12 3 1 1 7 4 7 2
Maryland 398 272 262 2 5 3 75 34 17
Massachusetts 183 122 52 0 1 69 30 22 9
Michigan 613 450 267 29 15 139 43 89 31
Minnesota 70 43 36 3 3 1 12 12 3
Mississippi 187 138 121 6 4 7 26 14 9
Missouri 364 276 158 13 9 96 28 42 18
Montana 18 7 2 3 1 1 4 5 2
Nebraska 65 42 35 2 1 4 7 9 7
Nevada 129 75 46 2 1 26 20 25 9
New Hampshire 16 6 1 2 1 2 4 6 0
New Jersey 379 269 238 1 5 25 51 41 18
New Mexico 121 60 45 2 2 11 21 32 8
New York 774 445 394 5 16 30 160 143 26
North Carolina 489 335 235 26 19 55 60 57 37
North Dakota 12 6 3 0 0 3 4 0 2
Ohio 488 344 187 8 13 136 44 80 20
Oklahoma 204 131 99 8 9 15 26 21 26
Oregon 77 40 13 1 2 24 22 10 5
Pennsylvania 636 470 379 8 19 64 73 66 27
Rhode Island 14 5 1 0 0 4 5 4 0
South Carolina 319 223 126 10 12 75 38 40 18
South Dakota 15 5 3 1 0 1 4 3 3
Tennessee 373 244 172 7 13 52 51 62 16
Texas 1,089 699 497 37 48 117 175 134 81
Utah 51 26 15 4 1 6 5 9 11
Vermont 8 4 2 0 0 2 2 2 0
Virginia 303 208 110 10 15 73 33 41 21
Washington 161 79 58 1 3 17 29 36 17
West Virginia 74 43 23 10 3 7 11 13 7
Wisconsin 135 80 60 7 3 10 21 13 21
Wyoming 15 11 7 0 0 4 0 1 3
Virgin Islands 38 31 27 0 0 4 5 2 0

1 Total number of murders for which supplemental homicide data were received.
2 Pushed is included in hands, fists, feet, etc.
3 Limited supplemental homicide data were received
Click to expand...

Check the link....or maybe a Mod can fix the formatting to make it read well.
 
Last edited:
Viv said:
In a gun free community, he will stun you.
Click to expand...

LOL I'd shoot him with one of my crossbows or fillet him with a Katana. even prisons aren't gun free

why do you deal with fantasies
 
 
Look at those death rates from states with big minority populations. No gun problem overall,
big race problem.
 
TurtleDude said:
LOL I'd shoot him with one of my crossbows or fillet him with a Katana. even prisons aren't gun free

why do you deal with fantasies
Click to expand...

Yes right. You think you're going to skewer someone with a crossbow, fillet him with Katanas and you're going to live to tell a smug tale.

Have you heard of law enforcement?

In the real world, you are not able to do any of those things with equanimity as you are going to jail. That you will ever use any of your strange weapons on another human being is fantasy.

But keep spending your money. It's keeping the economy afloat...or not...
 
Boo Radley said:
What I don't understand is why anyone think these matter.
Click to expand...

He is linking to inaccurate statistics. It matters that right wing rednecks and NRA may use inaccurate stats as propaganda to negatively influence popular opinion.

Longstreet said:
Look at those death rates from states with big minority populations. No gun problem overall,
big race problem.
Click to expand...

This proves the point...it matters a bit...
 
Viv said:
Yes right. You think you're going to skewer someone with a crossbow, fillet him with Katanas and you're going to live to tell a smug tale.

Have you heard of law enforcement?

In the real world, you are not able to do any of those things with equanimity as you are going to jail. That you will ever use any of your strange weapons on another human being is fantasy.

But keep spending your money. It's keeping the economy afloat...or not...
Click to expand...
Uh you are confused again. there is no such thing as a gun free community and a stun gun is worthless against stuff like swords or crossbows. as to cops-that is irrelevant to your silly rant
 
Viv said:
He is linking to inaccurate statistics. It matters that right wing rednecks and NRA may use inaccurate stats as propaganda to negatively influence popular opinion.



This proves the point...it matters a bit...
Click to expand...

the average NRA member is both better educated and more affluent than the average voter. while it might comfort the timid gun haters to call NRA members "rednecks" its rather stupid because the odds are an NRA member makes more than the gun hater does and is better educated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom