• We will be taking the forum down for maintenance at [5:15 am CDT] - in 15 minutes. We should be down less than 1 hour.
  • 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

How many shootings in the U.S. per year is too many?

How many shootings in the U.S. per year is too many?

  • Total voters
    23
jfuh said:
This is the obtuse I was speaking of. Sure some people get a thrill out of target practice but again, a gun was built with one purpose in mind - lethality. If not we'd still have ancient muskets around.
Click to expand...

That's one particular usage of a gun, sure. Can you not recognize that other people have other uses for guns and that banning guns would be forcing your (valid, well developed) viewpoint on people in different situations with equally valid viewpoints?
 
Saboteur said:
Not the same, cars are mostly a necessity. Guns are a luxury.
Click to expand...
That's a ridiculous statement. Guns aren't necessary until you need them. Good luck if you face an armed assailant empty handed.
 
jfuh said:
This is the obtuse I was speaking of. Sure some people get a thrill out of target practice but again, a gun was built with one purpose in mind - lethality. If not we'd still have ancient muskets around.
Click to expand...
Just a little devil's advocate here. You'd much rather be shot by a modern gun than a blackpowder rifle, less tissue damage, easier to treat, better chance of survival.
 
jfuh said:
Fair play, but ask yourself this question then.
But let's not be coy here, what's the sole purpose of any gun?
Do cars play such a roll? Alcohol? Tobacco?
Click to expand...

Guns are fun too, albeit in a different way.
 
Saboteur said:
Premeditated murders and suicides yes. But what about the woman who kills her husband and his prostitute before she realizes that she's the one in trouble now? Should it just be legal to kill in a moment of passion?

And in suicides, most people have a specific plan. They take pills or hang themselves or jump off buildings. I have a freind that was in the german military for several years. One of his soldiers killed himself by hanging. He could have shot himself or, like my friend says, "we had explosives he could have gone out a little more interestingly". So I contend that if their was no gun for those who shoot themselves, they'd still be here long enough to get help.
Click to expand...

Maybe we should ban buildings and bridges as well.

Are there really people that moronic on this board that they are suggesting banning anything that people can kill themselves with?
 
Saboteur said:
Not the same, cars are mostly a necessity. Guns are a luxury.
Click to expand...

Having shot a mugger I dispute your nonsense. more people have saved their lives with a gun than a car.
 
jfuh said:
How does it protect? Maybe to kill?
Click to expand...

Sure, or deterrence.

How? Killing the prey perhaps?
Click to expand...

Yep.

This is the obtuse I was speaking of. Sure some people get a thrill out of target practice but again, a gun was built with one purpose in mind - lethality. If not we'd still have ancient muskets around.
Click to expand...

I'm just not seeing the problem.
 
jfuh said:
Again, the exact obtuseness I was speaking of. A gun was built with being as lethal as possible for the category in which it was intended to fill.
It was meant to kill or cause massive injury so as to in turn become protective to someone that wields it, able to hunt for food or god forbid the fun of killing for sport:roll: Or in the criminal world a sign of power.

Car? no, it was built to transport
Alcohol - it's for entertainment
Tobacco - again entertainment/relaxant
You can not assign the same form of killing/injury intent of guns as you can to the later three no matter how you cut it.
Click to expand...

Assuming arguendo that you're right, why does that matter at all? Are you actually arguing that the intent behind the invention of a product matters more than how it's used in practice?

Again, as pointed out above, guns have a multitude of practical uses aside from pleasure. In contrast, alcohol and tobacco have almost no practical use except for pleasure, yet are responsible for approximately 5-10 times as many deaths each year.
 
jfuh said:
How does it protect? Maybe to kill?
How? Killing the prey perhaps?
Click to expand...
The right to arms is predicated on the fact that sometimes people need to kill other people.
Given that... what's your point?
 
Saboteur said:
Not the same, cars are mostly a necessity. Guns are a luxury.
Click to expand...
If guns are a luxury, why are they specifically protected by the Constitution?
 
Goobieman said:
If guns are a luxury, why are they specifically protected by the Constitution?
Click to expand...
Because (according to the left) the Founders were rich, greedy, white slave owners. ;)
 
Last edited:
Despit my link to an anit-gun site and my response to Frolicking Dinosaurs this poll was not to be for banning guns. I just wanted to see how many people here care about other people with regard to gun violence. Now that I see that people who support gun ownership also support gun violence I have a pretty good gage on what the general concencus here is...
 
Saboteur said:
Despit my link to an anit-gun site and my response to Frolicking Dinosaurs this poll was not to be for banning guns. I just wanted to see how many people here care about other people with regard to gun violence. Now that I see that people who support gun ownership also support gun violence I have a pretty good gage on what the general concencus here is...
Click to expand...



now this is just a stupid comment.....
 
Saboteur said:
Despit my link to an anit-gun site and my response to Frolicking Dinosaurs this poll was not to be for banning guns. I just wanted to see how many people here care about other people with regard to gun violence. Now that I see that people who support gun ownership also support gun violence I have a pretty good gage on what the general concencus here is...
Click to expand...
What you fail to undedstand:
In a free society, there will always be violence -- for to limit people to the point where they cannot commit violence, that society, necessarily, cannot be free.

So:
Do you want to live in a free society, or a society free from violence?
 
Last edited:
You guys know what you said and now you're attacking me and trying to change the subject. You support gun violence it's as simple as that and now I know where you are coming from, you want to kill people. In fact you probably fantasize about it when you handle your guns in front of your full length mirrors.
 
TurtleDude said:
Having shot a mugger I dispute your nonsense. more people have saved their lives with a gun than a car.
Click to expand...

So how did the court hearing go for you then?
 
Saboteur said:
You guys know what you said and now you're attacking me and trying to change the subject. You support gun violence it's as simple as that and now I know where you are coming from, you want to kill people. In fact you probably fantasize about it when you handle your guns in front of your full length mirrors.
Click to expand...





Actually it is you who supports violent criminals as they prey on the people you want disarmed.


Tell me will you put your money where your mouth is and put a lighted sign in your window that says "Gun Free Home"?
 
Goobieman said:
The right to arms is predicated on the fact that sometimes people need to kill other people.
Given that... what's your point?
Click to expand...

Well you should use that defense and see if that convinces the jury of justifiable homicide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom