• 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!

To buy or not to buy...

Question: Should I get this or my daughter's birthday?

  • Total voters
    25
WillRockwell said:
Because I refuse to pander to your gestapo tactics.
Click to expand...


Right. You have trouble with being honest. This is just another in a long line of examples in your short history here.


just when you send someone for my guns, come yourself, don't send someone elses son to come do your dirty work, ok? :2wave:
 
WillRockwell said:
Where have I ever expressed an opinion on firearms beyond calling for an acceptance of responsibility from the firearm community? In fact, show me anyone who has called for the confiscation of firearms?
Click to expand...

Yeah. "Acceptance of responsibility from the firearm community."

Nice one, Orwell. What does this "acceptance of responsibility" entail, specifically? Heavy on the "specifically."

If you claim to be misrepresented, now's your chance to be crystal clear. If you don't take it, then conclusions may be fairly drawn.
 
Last edited:
Harshaw said:
Yeah. "Acceptance of responsibility from the firearm community."

Nice one, Orwell. What does this "acceptance of responsibility entail, specifically? Heavy on the "specifically."

If you claim to be misrepresented, now's your chance to be crystal clear. If you don't take it, then conclusions may be fairly drawn.
Click to expand...





Stop that! Stop those "gestapo tactics!" :lamo
 
Harshaw said:
Yeah. "Acceptance of responsibility from the firearm community."

Nice one, Orwell. What does this "acceptance of responsibility" entail, specifically? Heavy on the "specifically."

If you claim to be misrepresented, now's your chance to be crystal clear. If you don't take it, then conclusions may be fairly drawn.
Click to expand...

As I have repeatedly stated, and will state again for your dim comprehension:
The firearms community are the experts on the functionality and responsibilities of gun ownership. They are intimately familiar with the use and maintenance of guns. It would be logical for firearms enthusiasts to take the lead in controlling who has access to weapons. Which guns are useful in sports, protection, hunting? Which guns have little use except for crime? Which weapons should be rigidly licensed for ownership only by collectors? How can we effectively trace firearms crimes through spent bullets and residue? What sort of screening processes would reduce the possibility of guns being sold to people who intend to use them for murder?

One would think the gun community would take the lead in these efforts to control access to weapons capable of mass murder. One would be wrong. On the contrary, the gun community has a knee-jerk reaction to any mention of gun control. They all seem to assume it is a slippery slope which does not end until federal agents are at their doors demanding their personal guns.

This is my position...that gun owners should take the lead in controlling firearms. Police departments are very vocal about gun control, but gun owners, led by the NRA, resist all legislation and oppose existing legislation. It is ridiculous to infer that guns should be confiscated, and no one is suggesting that. However, gun owners need to act responsibly, and help find a solution to the escalating pattern of violence that seems to have no end.
 
WillRockwell said:
As I have repeatedly stated, and will state again for your dim comprehension:
The firearms community are the experts on the functionality and responsibilities of gun ownership. They are intimately familiar with the use and maintenance of guns. It would be logical for firearms enthusiasts to take the lead in controlling who has access to weapons. Which guns are useful in sports, protection, hunting? Which guns have little use except for crime? Which weapons should be rigidly licensed for ownership only by collectors? How can we effectively trace firearms crimes through spent bullets and residue? What sort of screening processes would reduce the possibility of guns being sold to people who intend to use them for murder?

One would think the gun community would take the lead in these efforts to control access to weapons capable of mass murder. One would be wrong. On the contrary, the gun community has a knee-jerk reaction to any mention of gun control. They all seem to assume it is a slippery slope which does not end until federal agents are at their doors demanding their personal guns.

This is my position...that gun owners should take the lead in controlling firearms. Police departments are very vocal about gun control, but gun owners, led by the NRA, resist all legislation and oppose existing legislation. It is ridiculous to infer that guns should be confiscated, and no one is suggesting that. However, gun owners need to act responsibly, and help find a solution to the escalating pattern of violence that seems to have no end.
Click to expand...




We do, We lead the fight against ignorant prohibitionists who use lies, emotion and nonsense for thier anti-American tyrannical agenda.


:2wave:
 
WillRockwell said:
As I have repeatedly stated, and will state again for your dim comprehension:
The firearms community are the experts on the functionality and responsibilities of gun ownership. They are intimately familiar with the use and maintenance of guns. It would be logical for firearms enthusiasts to take the lead in controlling who has access to weapons. Which guns are useful in sports, protection, hunting? Which guns have little use except for crime? Which weapons should be rigidly licensed for ownership only by collectors? How can we effectively trace firearms crimes through spent bullets and residue? What sort of screening processes would reduce the possibility of guns being sold to people who intend to use them for murder?

One would think the gun community would take the lead in these efforts to control access to weapons capable of mass murder. One would be wrong. On the contrary, the gun community has a knee-jerk reaction to any mention of gun control. They all seem to assume it is a slippery slope which does not end until federal agents are at their doors demanding their personal guns.

This is my position...that gun owners should take the lead in controlling firearms. Police departments are very vocal about gun control, but gun owners, led by the NRA, resist all legislation and oppose existing legislation. It is ridiculous to infer that guns should be confiscated, and no one is suggesting that. However, gun owners need to act responsibly, and help find a solution to the escalating pattern of violence that seems to have no end.
Click to expand...
we do
its called supporting The Right to Bear Arms
 
WillRockwell said:
As I have repeatedly stated, and will state again for your dim comprehension:
Click to expand...
You're the wrong person to be talking about other peoples' 'dim comprehension'.

The firearms community are the experts on the functionality and responsibilities of gun ownership
Click to expand...
Clearly.
They are intimately familiar with the use and maintenance of guns.
Click to expand...
Clearly.
Dont forget 'safe use and storage' as well.
It would be logical for firearms enthusiasts to take the lead in controlling who has access to weapons.
Click to expand...
False premise. The firearms community is VERY active in this.
That their activity doesnt manifest itself in a manner you agree with doesnt change that.
Which guns are useful in sports, protection, hunting?
Click to expand...
As a member of the firearms comminuty, and an expert in your book:
All of them.
Which guns have little use except for crime?
Click to expand...
As a member of the firearms comminuty, and an expert in your book:
None of them.
Which weapons should be rigidly licensed for ownership only by collectors?
Click to expand...
As a member of the firearms comminuty, and an expert in your book:
None of them.
How can we effectively trace firearms crimes through spent bullets and residue?
Click to expand...
We've had this ability for a long time. Catch an episide of CSI.
What sort of screening processes would reduce the possibility of guns being sold to people who intend to use them for murder?
Click to expand...
None that are not prohibited by the Constitution.
One would think the gun community would take the lead in these efforts to control access to weapons capable of mass murder
Click to expand...
Again:The firearms community is VERY active in this.
That their activity doesnt manifest itself in a manner you agree with doesnt change that.
This is my position...that gun owners should take the lead in controlling firearms.
Click to expand...
3rd time:
The firearms community is VERY active in this.
That their activity doesnt manifest itself in a manner you agree with doesnt change that.

Your entire position here is based on a false dichotomy -- that YOUR way is the only way someone can "take the lead in controlling firearms".

And so, you have been proven wrong. You can run away now.
 
There were two possibilities.

Either WillRockwell would ignore the question . . .

Or he would answer it in a way which shows he has no idea what he's talking about. The "firearms community" is VERY responsible concerning the safe ownership of guns, and the promulgating of guidelines for the same. (Criminals don't care about any of that, but they are, by definition, outside that community.)

He took the second, but I suppose that's gutsier than the first. So, kudos for that much.

I'm waiting to see some "centrism" somewhere, though.
 
WillRockwell said:
As I have repeatedly stated, and will state again for your dim comprehension:
The firearms community are the experts on the functionality and responsibilities of gun ownership. They are intimately familiar with the use and maintenance of guns. It would be logical for firearms enthusiasts to take the lead in controlling who has access to weapons. Which guns are useful in sports, protection, hunting? Which guns have little use except for crime? Which weapons should be rigidly licensed for ownership only by collectors? How can we effectively trace firearms crimes through spent bullets and residue? What sort of screening processes would reduce the possibility of guns being sold to people who intend to use them for murder?

One would think the gun community would take the lead in these efforts to control access to weapons capable of mass murder. One would be wrong. On the contrary, the gun community has a knee-jerk reaction to any mention of gun control. They all seem to assume it is a slippery slope which does not end until federal agents are at their doors demanding their personal guns.

This is my position...that gun owners should take the lead in controlling firearms. Police departments are very vocal about gun control, but gun owners, led by the NRA, resist all legislation and oppose existing legislation. It is ridiculous to infer that guns should be confiscated, and no one is suggesting that. However, gun owners need to act responsibly, and help find a solution to the escalating pattern of violence that seems to have no end.
Click to expand...
I think folks we have an early leader for asshat of the year.
 
I took the time to explain my position in a mature and reasonable manner, and receive nothing but ridicule. **** you all.
 
WillRockwell said:
I took the time to explain my position in a mature and reasonable manner, and receive nothing but ridicule. **** you all.
Click to expand...
From me, you received a step-by-step refutal of your position and a details explanatuion as to why you're wrong.

If you think you're position is sound, the thing for you to do now is to defend it.

Instead, AS predicted, you're running away.
 
WillRockwell said:
I took the time to explain my position in a mature and reasonable manner, and receive nothing but ridicule. **** you all.
Click to expand...
yeah man, its the internet
my smack was more a play on your word choice
get over it and prove your point or concede defeat
 
WillRockwell said:
I took the time to explain my position in a mature and reasonable manner, and receive nothing but ridicule. **** you all.
Click to expand...

"I'm yer huckleberry."


You take the position that gun owners should lead the way in "responsibility" and then define "responsibility" as gun control laws; specifically those restricting ownership of certain types of weapons and so on.

You follow by accusing pro-gunners of reactionary knee-jerk opposition to all gun control laws.


It has been well established by innumerable studies and scholarly research that:
A. Strict gun control invariably causes an increase in violent crime. (see DC, Chicago, NYC, etc. Even Britain experienced an increase in violent crime.)
B. "Shall issue" (easily obtained) concealed carry laws invariably result in a decrease in violent crime in each state where they are enacted.

The AWB demonstrably did not decrease that tiny fraction of a percent of violent crimes committed with so-called "assault weapons".

In short, pre-emptive (ie taking it away from lawful citizens) gun control accomplishes nothing of any benefit, and typically makes things worse.

On the other hand, putting violent criminals away and keeping them out of society most definately DOES. Also proven fact.

So, if it is crime you're worried about, the type of control you need is CRIMINAL CONTROL. Not gun control. Hm, that makes a good slogan: "Control Criminals, not guns!" :mrgreen:

In the matter of how guns help safeguard liberty, you have been given half the answer: the arms of the colonists were their tool in freeing themselves from the oppression of King George III. If oppression reaches a similar point again, privately held arms will again be such a tool. I suspect that is why tyrants confiscate guns before revealing their full agenda (ie Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc). (Btw, there are so many Founders quotes supporting this position that it would take all day to read them all.)

It comes down to this: YOU do not get to define what is "responsible" for everyone else. If a man commits a crime or an act of negligence with a firearm, hold him accountable for his actions; leave the rest of us alone.


G.
 
Last edited:
LaMidRighter said:
I think folks we have an early leader for asshat of the year.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Let's remember the Vegas rules folks. Campaigning upstairs is not allowed.

Infractions and thread bans already issued. Let's step up our game folks.
 
Last edited:
WillRockwell said:
I took the time to explain my position in a mature and reasonable manner, and receive nothing but ridicule. **** you all.
Click to expand...

Goobieman responded in depth, point-by-point; there was little left to add other than what I said, and what a few others did -- that your definition of "take responsibility" is flawed.

So, for the most part, the responses were substantive and not "ridicule." Unless you think "ridicule" is "anything other than complete agreement"?
 
emdash said:
seriously, has your dad never given you a gun? it's how they show their love.

he says daughter, since I can't give you height and upper body strength I want you to have this. if you don't want a dislocated shoulder listen carefully.

my sibs and I all got bb guns before we were 10 anyway. mine was actually my dad's when he was a kid. good times.

it's not a bad idea unless your kid's an idiot.

I think this thread is a joke.
Click to expand...

I was being funny or trying to be funny:mrgreen:;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom