• 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!

Obama taps Biden to craft new policies to curb gun violence in wake of shooting

How does a gun that you claim only has cosmetic differences, protect you better than other guns available?
Wait...are you suggesting I should use a basic .308 hunting rifle instead of an AR 15 for home defense???
 
Ahhh arrogance, thy name be turtledud

Doesn't matter how good a shot you think you are or how bad you think I might be- mag cap for rifles set at 20 works for me... good enough when I carried the Mattel toy on a two way range, good enough now that I am a veteran. Nothing you can't do with 20 that you would need 30 for off a one way play day range unless the objective is mass murder but another guy pointed out you can kill lots of people with quick mag changes...

Hope that helps you understand... :peace



so you don't have a rational argument.

color me surprised

Not

you cannot fashion a single argument that would convince anyone with some degree of objectivity
 
Reducing the magazine capacity for "safety" is such illogical thinking. So what size should the mag be?
Is the thinking that 20 is safer than 30, or nine is safer, or 1?
Well then lets all go a back to 55mph in our vehicles, its safer than 75. Wait lets make it 25 and include breath analyzers in all vehicles to ensure we don't drive drunk.

The mass shooting events are tragic. Looking at the weapon is a very small part. Finding out what is causing these people to go off and correcting that will do more than any gun laws.
 
2 reasons. 1-because the second doesn't JUST protect my right to self defense weapons and 2-because some people ****ing WANT them. The like to shoot 30 rounders at the range and enjoy sport shooting. Dood...the absolute reality is that an average of TWO people out of 330 MILLION per year commit some sort of a spree type killing and NOT always (less than 25% of the time) use semi automatic rifles. It's not even a great majority...it's virtually ALL firearm owners with those 30 fond magazines are responsible law abiding citizens. Considering the facts it is is PATHETIC it is even a consideration.

2 seconds isn't exactly speed loading btw. Mag release takes no time and hand to mag mag and round chambered isn't a great task. A 20 year old kid just did it 3 times with no one around to stop him.

What 'other than' right past self defense do you think you need? I used 20 round mags back in the day.

people want all kindsa things, fully automatic weapons without all the paperwork... everything a grunt of cop has, to marry their same sex partner...lotsa wants out there

They would like to spend the day shooting belt fed, firing from the open bolt position machineguns.

I do a bit of pistol shooting ;) my point was you can't miss fast enough, rapid reload of any mag isn't a big deal I agree.
 
so you don't have a rational argument.

color me surprised

Not

you cannot fashion a single argument that would convince anyone with some degree of objectivity

You don't see other people's opinions as rational, color me surprised... ;)
 
What 'other than' right past self defense do you think you need? I used 20 round mags back in the day.

people want all kindsa things, fully automatic weapons without all the paperwork... everything a grunt of cop has, to marry their same sex partner...lotsa wants out there

They would like to spend the day shooting belt fed, firing from the open bolt position machineguns.

I do a bit of pistol shooting ;) my point was you can't miss fast enough, rapid reload of any mag isn't a big deal I agree.
30 round magazines would be standard capacity if they were ever needed to function in the capacity of, say, the unorganized militia as specified in the US Code. Or to repel a foreign invader as a last line of national defense. Or...against a tyrannical government that might consider abandoning the Constitution. All VERY unlikely scenarios...agreed. So lets go back to the original statement...because they WANT them.

Look...face facts...YOU are considering a ban on an issue that you KNOW would make absolutely NO difference...for the mere sake of passing a ban. That's...not only far less than brilliant...it is corrupt.
 
30 round magazines would be standard capacity if they were ever needed to function in the capacity of, say, the unorganized militia as specified in the US Code. Or to repel a foreign invader as a last line of national defense. Or...against a tyrannical government that might consider abandoning the Constitution. All VERY unlikely scenarios...agreed. So lets go back to the original statement...because they WANT them.

Look...face facts...YOU are considering a ban on an issue that you KNOW would make absolutely NO difference...for the mere sake of passing a ban. That's...not only far less than brilliant...it is corrupt.

As a guy who carried the M16A1 as part of the Regular Army I can assure you a semi-automatic weapon does good service with 20 round mags and you do much better in the prone with a 20 round mag sticking out the bottom. Remember it will be a two way range- make yourself a small target.

Now the function of the unorganized militia is to feed men into more organized units, a mass of men to draw from, not to form up and march to the sound of cannon. It also has an age limit, are you saying that the militia style weapons are to be surrendered once we age out? We need to turn in our ARs n AKs once we get social security?

You are the one saying the mag cap makes no difference, please don't throw that on me. I asked if it makes no difference then why insist on having them? Your basic argument for them is WANT, yet people want everything from machineguns to gay marriage.

Personally I would lean for higher funding of mental healthcare, but I don't see accepting 20 round magazines for semi-automatic rifles as enabling a tyrannical gubmint or endangering the 2nd Amendment.

But like I said I carried 20 round mags for my select fire gubmint issue M16A1, never felt under mag'd
 
As a guy who carried the M16A1 as part of the Regular Army I can assure you a semi-automatic weapon does good service with 20 round mags and you do much better in the prone with a 20 round mag sticking out the bottom. Remember it will be a two way range- make yourself a small target.

Now the function of the unorganized militia is to feed men into more organized units, a mass of men to draw from, not to form up and march to the sound of cannon. It also has an age limit, are you saying that the militia style weapons are to be surrendered once we age out? We need to turn in our ARs n AKs once we get social security?

You are the one saying the mag cap makes no difference, please don't throw that on me. I asked if it makes no difference then why insist on having them? Your basic argument for them is WANT, yet people want everything from machineguns to gay marriage.

Personally I would lean for higher funding of mental healthcare, but I don't see accepting 20 round magazines for semi-automatic rifles as enabling a tyrannical gubmint or endangering the 2nd Amendment.

But like I said I carried 20 round mags for my select fire gubmint issue M16A1, never felt under mag'd
so you ARE actually suggesting a magazine capacity ban would prevent these incidents? My bad...I assumed you were corrupt... Not foolish.

I spent 20 years in the military. My semiauto rifles have 10 and 15 round mags. I personally don't care if the mags are 20 or 100 round drums. I oppose idiotic laws passed by weak minded people under the pretense that they care or are actually accomplishing something.
 
you just don't get it

you gun haters who want to harass us gun owners want to ban guns incrementally. start with scary looks you will continue to take more and more and more



and magazine limits are substantive

I have a great idea, if owning a gun causes you to lose sleep or the control of parts of your body, don't OWN one

but stop pretending your motivations for trying to restrict what other citizens own given your motivations are based on a desire to harass people who don't buy into your agenda


You did not answer the question. "How does a gun that you claim only has cosmetic differences, protect you better than other guns available?
 
Wait...are you suggesting I should use a basic .308 hunting rifle instead of an AR 15 for home defense???


Use the guns that fanatics have claimed for years are no different than the assault weapons, except cosmetically.
 
Use the guns that fanatics have claimed for years are no different than the assault weapons, except cosmetically.

So...a good old fashioned .308. One of if not the best all purpose hunting round. NOT a Bushmaster AR15 .223 (the ballistic equivalent of an M-16)?
 
So...a good old fashioned .308. One of if not the best all purpose hunting round. NOT a Bushmaster AR15 .223 (the ballistic equivalent of an M-16)?

Whatever gun you guys referred to before as being legal and being the equivalent to the assault weapons, except for cosmetic differences.
 
Last edited:
Ever heard of the bully pulpit?

So the president is going to advocate for additional federal legislation. And under which one of Congress' enumerated powers will such legislation fall?
 
You don't see other people's opinions as rational, color me surprised... ;)

When those opinion infringe upon my rights you're damn right we don't. Such opinions are NOT RATIONAL. They are emotional and knee jerk reactionary.

You are not my master. Obama is not my master. You don't get to dictate to me what my rights are. The Bill of Rights STATES what my rights are. Rights that are not granted by Government. They are Rights that transcend Government.

If you want to talk about taking rights away, fine, let's have that discussion. We can start with abortion which murders more than 3 thousand innocent children in the womb every single damn day.
 
Whatever gun you guys referred to before as being legal and being the equivalent to the assault weapons, except for cosmetic differences.

Right. Like a .308 hunting rifle vs a .308 'assault rifle' with a front grip. Or a scoped Bushmaster .223 hunting rifle commonly used by deer hunters across the country vs the evil Bushmaster .223 assault rifle with a grip.
 
Right. Like a .308 hunting rifle vs a .308 'assault rifle' with a front grip. Or a scoped Bushmaster .223 hunting rifle commonly used by deer hunters across the country vs the evil Bushmaster .223 assault rifle with a grip.

If that's the one you guys are referring to for the last several years. Here are the guns they are proposing to ban:

the Colt AR-15, a semiautomatic version of the M-16 machine gun used by our armed forces, the Uzi, and the Tec-9 pistol.

The point is, you guys said their was no advantage to an assault weapon over other guns available, so you can't now legitimately claim hardship if they are banned.
 
If that's the one you guys are referring to for the last several years. Here are the guns they are proposing to ban:

the Colt AR-15, a semiautomatic version of the M-16 machine gun used by our armed forces, the Uzi, and the Tec-9 pistol.

The point is, you guys said their was no advantage to an assault weapon over other guns available, so you can't now legitimately claim hardship if they are banned.
Great. So you want to ban this guy
Colt AR 15.jpg
But will allow for this...
59229.jpg
And this
R15_450Bushmaster.jpg
And this (which isn't a bad choice...the police like it as well)
SWAT .308.jpg
 
You are afraid of a name...a combination of words put together to give you something to fight against. You are scared ****less of a Colt AR15 because someone TOLD you it was an evil killing machine (oooohhh noes!!! It has a handle!). They fire in pretty much the same manner, have only the slightest ballistic differences, and my hunting rifle can accept a 10, 20, 30 round magazine or a double ought 100 round drum. And you wonder why we aren't exactly thrilled with you and people like you advocating for laws.
 
You are afraid of a name...a combination of words put together to give you something to fight against. You are scared ****less of a Colt AR15 because someone TOLD you it was an evil killing machine (oooohhh noes!!! It has a handle!). They fire in pretty much the same manner, have only the slightest ballistic differences, and my hunting rifle can accept a 10, 20, 30 round magazine or a double ought 100 round drum. And you wonder why we aren't exactly thrilled with you and people like you advocating for laws.


Obviously, I am not the most frightened, as I require no more than a shotgun for home protection.

Glad to hear though that you feel banning of the assault weapons is no hardship for gun owners. Spread the word!!!
 
I'm extremely curious, as is everyone here I'm sure, just exactly what, if anything, is going to happen. I consider myself very liberal/progressive, so this might come as a surprise as most democrats right now are going ape-**** as 'prisoners of the moment'. What I would like to see happen isn't certain guns taken away, I would just like to see some more strict purchasing requirements. Also, I would like to see the gunshow loophole and internet policy changed. But as far as completely outlawing certain assault rifles, I dont think that is going to do anything to fix this problem we have. I have other things I would like to see done as well with this issue, but this is the big one I'd like to see.

Here's to hoping Obama/Biden can get this thing done right. If anyone thinks I'm wrong or missing something, feel free to let me know.
 
Obviously, I am not the most frightened, as I require no more than a shotgun for home protection.

Glad to hear though that you feel banning of the assault weapons is no hardship for gun owners. Spread the word!!!
dood...you can't even DEFINE an assault weapon. You just advocated for the ownership of weapons that are identical to your dreaded assault rifle. And BTW...I can put a rail system, light, collapsing stock and front grip on your "shotgun" and guess what it becomes.
 
Gun Control Polls Shift After Tragic Shootings But Party Affiliation Is Key

I think a good number of people want to look at tighter gun control laws. So you are wrong here. Also he wants to look at other areas where we can improve. So our President is doing his job. I am sick to death of hearing about the 2nd amendment and how it give right to unlimited gun ownership. Plus ask any rational person why they need a 30 or 100 clip and the best they can come up with is maybe target practice. Bottom line the President is doing his job. I guess he had the pusle of right wing America more than most of us thought. Cling to guns and religion, and that scares the crap out of a majority of Americans

There is a reason we are a Republic...and not a Democracy.

It's to prevent those with your mindset who believe that those who have the ability to sway public opinion should have the ability to abrogate our Constitutional rights.
 
dood...you can't even DEFINE an assault weapon. You just advocated for the ownership of weapons that are identical to your dreaded assault rifle. And BTW...I can put a rail system, light, collapsing stock and front grip on your "shotgun" and guess what it becomes.

Sounds like you are good to go then! Again, I am glad to hear the proposed ban creates no hardships for you guys!
 
so you ARE actually suggesting a magazine capacity ban would prevent these incidents? My bad...I assumed you were corrupt... Not foolish.

I spent 20 years in the military. My semiauto rifles have 10 and 15 round mags. I personally don't care if the mags are 20 or 100 round drums. I oppose idiotic laws passed by weak minded people under the pretense that they care or are actually accomplishing something.

So you are ASS-uming yet again. I never suggested anything more than your argument for 30 round magazines boils down to-

They want 'em.

Nothing more than that.

My question is if you think mag cap doesn't matter to mass murder body counts then why fight the 20 round mag for semi-auto firearms?

Your response was some theoretical invasion or fighting the Gubmint.

You didn't address any of the points I brought up to include surrendering our military style weapons once we age out, but throw partisan parroting- corrupt, foolish, weak minded.

No discussion, just blowing smoke... :peace
 
Sounds like you are good to go then! Again, I am glad to hear the proposed ban creates no hardships for you guys!

What do you mean "you guys"? Unless you are sporting an old single shot Savage 12 gauge you own an "assault weapon". That's the problem with talking about banning **** you don't know anything about. "Weeeee! Look at us! We passed a law!" What did it do? "**** all...but who cares? We passed a law!"
 
Back
Top Bottom