• 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!

Are gun owners STILL paranoid?

Are gun owners STILL paranoid?


  • Total voters
    25
The anti-gun left -hates- people that know what they are talking about.

The more ignorant one is of the subject of weapons, the more fervent one is about banning them
 
The generic reasoning behind a want for any ban is that there are some weapons for which there is no legitimate interest and that the government has justification for banning because it puts our society at risk.
If you take the anti-gun/ban position --- ANY gun puts our society at risk.
If you take the pro-gun/anti-ban position ---NO weapon should be restricted.

The bigger question is what falls within the gray areas.

How can a government arm its civilian employees with select fire submachine guns and 17 shot handguns and then have the audacity that other civilians have no legitimate use for such guns>
 
You aren't willing or able to engage in the discussion as it has been presented to you?
So noted.

The problem is that one side is honest about its motivations while the other side is not

Us pro rights advocates have no hidden agenda-I believe federal gun bans are unconstitutional and any weapon civilian employees of the government can use-I should be able to own as well. When we achieve that parity, then we can talk about crew served heavy weapons or artillery but small arms are clearly protected. And that freedom trumps whether or not unconstitutional laws would make us safer.

The ARCs arguments are based on a false premise-they pretend that public safety motivates them. We all know how bogus that is given they push for laws that have absolutely no relevance to making us safer-such as opposing CCW licenses etc. Since the ARCs cannot be honest with what causes them to push gun bans we will never have a reasonable debate with them.
 
That is as stupid as saying that a ban on Roman Catholic churches doesn't deny anyone religious freedom because they can go to Episcopal cathederals or Luthern houses of worship.
Yes. Its exactly the same thing.
 
The ARCs arguments are based on a false premise-they pretend that public safety motivates them.
Simple posession of any firearm is no more a danger to public safety than the simple posession of penises.

But then, isn't anyone with a penis is a potential rapist?
Shouldn't they then have their rights restricted accordingly?
 
Last edited:
Simple posession of any firearm is no more a danger to public safety than the simple posession of penises.

But then, isn't anyone with a penis is a potential rapist?
Shouldn't they then have their rights restricted accordingly?

Just wait. The more feminized the Dem party becomes the more likely such a scheme will be proposed.
 
To anyone who thinks the constitution "allows" restrictions, or bans... consider these words.

Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth. - George Washington
 
To anyone who thinks the constitution "allows" restrictions, or bans... consider these words.

Many liberals despise Washington and what he stood for just as many of them hate the constitution as being a roadblock to the imposition of a "peoples' paradise"
 
Many liberals despise Washington and what he stood for just as many of them hate the constitution as being a roadblock to the imposition of a "peoples' paradise"

Yeah, what a jerk he was for being one of the founders of this nation!

The audacity! :roll:
 
From:
Urban Policy



So now, it is official White House policy to reinstate the AW Ban.

Seems to me we were told there was no rational reason to express concern for our right to keep and bear arms under the Obama Administration...

An olympic shooter ,dureing the Cliton admin, was disallowed possession of her special weapon ,in Kalipornia ,becuase the appearance of the weapon was "not unlike an assault weapon"... /Kalipornia law. Single shot 22,bolt action ,with a fancy stock and stabilizer protrusion.The idiots who wrote the law don`t know a gun from a firearm...or one of those things we use for fun. Socialist law is a little trickyer that conservative law, So look out for Joe and Barry.
 
An olympic shooter ,dureing the Cliton admin, was disallowed possession of her special weapon ,in Kalipornia ,becuase the appearance of the weapon was "not unlike an assault weapon"... /Kalipornia law. Single shot 22,bolt action ,with a fancy stock and stabilizer protrusion.The idiots who wrote the law don`t know a gun from a firearm...or one of those things we use for fun. Socialist law is a little trickyer that conservative law, So look out for Joe and Barry.

The olympic shooting team for the U.K. don't even live in the U.K. because they aren't allowed to shoot or own their OLYMPIC SPORTING ARM there.

How big of a slap in the face is that? "Compete for our country, but keep that **** out of here!!!"
 
The olympic shooting team for the U.K. don't even live in the U.K. because they aren't allowed to shoot or own their OLYMPIC SPORTING ARM there.

How big of a slap in the face is that? "Compete for our country, but keep that **** out of here!!!"

the 3000 dollar 22short rapid fire pistols used in the olympic pentathalon and RF pistol events were classified as assault weapons by the Peoples' Republic of Kalifornia because they were semi auto and had a magazine in front of the trigger guard.
 
the 3000 dollar 22short rapid fire pistols used in the olympic pentathalon and RF pistol events were classified as assault weapons by the Peoples' Republic of Kalifornia because they were semi auto and had a magazine in front of the trigger guard.

I could never live in California.

Especially in the line of work I'm going into... I'd be pissed off carrying the weapons I would be for work, then going home and not having the same courtesy extended to my family.
 
I could never live in California.

Especially in the line of work I'm going into... I'd be pissed off carrying the weapons I would be for work, then going home and not having the same courtesy extended to my family.

any politician who votes for gun bans not only should be denied police protection above and beyond what ordinary citizens get, they should be forced to post that fact on their homes. Any cop that supports gun bans should be stripped of carrying guns paid for by the taxpayers.
 
ABC News: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

So... does anyone STILL think gun owners are paranoid?

What the **** is this retard smoking?

See below.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the

What is the positive move for the United States? I have not seen any evidence of positivity from the AWB.

And remind me why I should give a **** what the criminals in Mexico have? THEY ARE CRIMINALS!!!! THEY WILL ****ING GET WHAT THEY WANT ANYWAYS!!!!

In the United States, we do NOT have access to modern Automatic weapons, or the Grenades they are supposedly toting en masse.

URGH!!!!!!!

In a time when money is already ****, we are going to waste more of it by punishing the law abiding citizens of the U.S.A. for what criminals of MEXICO do???????????????????????? ->?<-
 
I have felt there should be a logical gun tracking system in which the registered owner should have to account for all their guns if audited.

Any gun transaction should be through a background check etc. If a gun gets stolen then it should be the owners responsibility to immediately file it. May not be perfect but it is a start until a better tracking system can be implimented.

That being said I would never support a gun ban on recreational hunting rifles or self defense handguns to responsible citizens.

I don't agree.

The government doesn't need to be auditing my gun collection. What I own is none of their damn business.

Any such system is a means of circumventing the 2nd Amendment.

The government is afraid of people who own guns --- and this is EXACTLY THE WAY OUR FOREFATHERS INTENDED IT TO BE.

The people shouldn't fear the government; the government should fear the people.
 
Back
Top Bottom