• 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!

NRA Newtown response [W:818]

Re: NRA Newtown response

There was armed guards at Combine and at Va. tech. Sounds to me like you are just regurgitating NRA talking points.

No, there were not. VA Tech were then unarmed (they are since armed), and at Columbine the lone security cop was outside, in the parking lot, in his car. He did get off one shot at Harris when that puke stepped outside during the melee. And missed.

All this has been discussed multiple times in-thread already.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Your insult, calling my post (and me) moronic aside your point is pointless. You're not a cop and you're not in law enforcement. Police should have all the weapons they need to do their JOB. You, on the other hand and all other civilians DO NOT NEED AR 15 type weapons to protect us. You might be very capable and well trained but you're not a professional who earns his living protecting people. You can use all the other fun guns you have in your personal stash to protect yourself. I don't see how you having a weapon that has magazines or drums that hold 100 or more rounds will come into play at any point in your life to "protect" yourself in a way that your other guns won't.

That's my, to use your personal insult "moronic" point. No civilian has a need for those sort of weapons to protect themselves. If that is what you need to protect yourself you must live in a part of America that I didn't know existed...an alternate universe or is it simply a make believe bubble?

BTW - can you stop using hyperbole/insults about other community members while making a point? Is that too challenging for you?

I see your logic as a bit moronic as well. The issue is not "100 round drums" btw, as only a fool uses such, as they are highly unreliable.

For you to suggest that any of us need be limited to lesser weapons, such as a handgun, when many of the bad guys have better weapons, often illegally obtained, is absurd.

Of course, you can make yourself a sitting-duck if you want to.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

There was armed guards at Combine and at Va. tech. Sounds to me like you are just regurgitating NRA talking points.

Sounds to me like the NRA attached a really, really stupid message to smart one and you swallowed the anti 2nd amendment bait hook, line and sinker. The news will often attach something illogical to something logical via inductive reasoning and people throw the baby (logic) out with the bathwater. (yes im trying to say the NRAs statement was to make average gun owners look stupid)
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

No, there were not. VA Tech were then unarmed (they are since armed), and at Columbine the lone security cop was outside, in the parking lot, in his car. He did get off one shot at Harris when that puke stepped outside during the melee. And missed.

All this has been discussed multiple times in-thread already.
I'm a n00b here. Sorry I didn't read 600+ posts before posting. I didn't realize that was in the TOS before I posted.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Sounds to me like the NRA attached a really, really stupid message to smart one and you swallowed the anti 2nd amendment bait hook, line and sinker. The news will often attach something illogical to something logical via inductive reasoning and people throw the baby (logic) out with the bathwater. (yes im trying to say the NRAs statement was to make average gun owners look stupid)
I don't own guns or hunt. However, I'm a strong supporter of gun owners rights. The constitution is clear. Not sure where you think I swallowed a NRA talking point. Could you please clarify?
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

I support owning guns and the second amendment, but I don't support the NRA any longer.


We just can't arm people and have armed guards everywhere. They finally responded because this mass shooting was so tragic and disturbing. They propose protecting babies, but offered nothing to protect people in malls, universities, high schools, movie cinemas, post offices, or any of the other places we have seen mass shootings.

Making every single place a gun zone doesn't seem feasible to me.


And especially when you have people like Lanza and Holmes, wearing body armor from head to toe.. it's going to take a lot more than a few shots to stop them. How many armed guards would it take to kill somebody armed to the teeth like Holmes and wearing armor from head to toe?


The shooting was disgusting. The NRA should take this more seriously, and not just consider it a elementary school type of concern.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

I support owning guns and the second amendment, but I don't support the NRA any longer.


We just can't arm people and have armed guards everywhere. They finally responded because this mass shooting was so tragic and disturbing. They propose protecting babies, but offered nothing to protect people in malls, universities, high schools, movie cinemas, post offices, or any of the other places we have seen mass shootings.

Making every single place a gun zone doesn't seem feasible to me.


And especially when you have people like Lanza and Holmes, wearing body armor from head to toe.. it's going to take a lot more than a few shots to stop them. How many armed guards would it take to kill somebody armed to the teeth like Holmes and wearing armor from head to toe?


The shooting was disgusting. The NRA should take this more seriously, and not just consider it a elementary school type of concern.

Some people seem to thing a hand gun will get the job done! Insert rolleyes
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

I support owning guns and the second amendment, but I don't support the NRA any longer.


We just can't arm people and have armed guards everywhere. They finally responded because this mass shooting was so tragic and disturbing. They propose protecting babies, but offered nothing to protect people in malls, universities, high schools, movie cinemas, post offices, or any of the other places we have seen mass shootings.

Making every single place a gun zone doesn't seem feasible to me.


And especially when you have people like Lanza and Holmes, wearing body armor from head to toe.. it's going to take a lot more than a few shots to stop them. How many armed guards would it take to kill somebody armed to the teeth like Holmes and wearing armor from head to toe?


The shooting was disgusting. The NRA should take this more seriously, and not just consider it a elementary school type of concern.

You do not undeerstand "body armor". Lanza was not wearing such, btw.

Without the secret service presence for the Obama kids, the Quaker School in D.C. where bigshots send their kids still has a security staff of 11. Some of them armed.

Now you try to figure out why. Hint "They know what the bad guys will come with" ;)
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

You, on the other hand and all other civilians DO NOT NEED AR 15 type weapons to protect us. You might be very capable and well trained but you're not a professional who earns his living protecting people. You can use all the other fun guns you have in your personal stash to protect yourself.

An AR15 is not even an assault rifle, and it doesn't matter if I "need" one or not. Just the fact that I want one, and am willing to buy it, will suffice as all the justification I (or anyone else) need.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Some people seem to thing a hand gun will get the job done! Insert rolleyes

Depending on what the job is, a handgun will get it done, depending on distance and numbers. That really doesn't matter though, when the discussion of gun ownership comes up. We don't have a 2nd amendment dependent on need, but dependent on the right to own and bear.
 
Last edited:
Re: NRA Newtown response

Depending on what the job is, a handgun will get it done, depending on distance and numbers. That really doesn't matter though, when the discussion of gown ownership comes up. We don't have a 2nd amendment dependent on need, but dependent on the right to own and bear.

In this case a handgun would have done nothing he was armed to the teeth and body armor. Sorry those that think a hand gun would have helped are flat wrong. I do see your point but in this case it a no go!
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

You do not undeerstand "body armor". Lanza was not wearing such, btw.

Without the secret service presence for the Obama kids, the Quaker School in D.C. where bigshots send their kids still has a security staff of 11. Some of them armed.

Now you try to figure out why. Hint "They know what the bad guys will come with" ;)

So what, you think we should have 11 armed guards at every school, university, shopping mall, movie cinema, post office, etc? Eventually well need those armed guards patrolling the streets then. I don't get how this is a solution.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

The NRA sounds like they condemn designated gun free zones. Should we all be allowed to pack heat in airports and now, and hire armed guards there as well.... libraries, congress, state capitals, government offices, etc.?

Is more guns and armed guards a universal solution?
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

In this case a handgun would have done nothing he was armed to the teeth and body armor. Sorry those that think a hand gun would have helped are flat wrong. I do see your point but in this case it a no go!

It's like the woman guard, she was armed and at a church... a gun man walked in and started firing. She hit him more than once, but a shot from his own gun to his head is what ended his life. And if I recall, he managed to kill some people in the process.

When people are wearing any armor, hitting them just right is important. Lanza was wearing a bullet proof vest from my understanding, and so was the VTech shooter. Holmes was better armed.

And when mass shooters use guns is capable of mowing people down, while the guards duck and try to get a clean shot, it would seem like the body count would be in the bad guys favor.

I don't see how the NRA's, more guns argument, is the best or only solution.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

I see your logic as a bit moronic as well. The issue is not "100 round drums" btw, as only a fool uses such, as they are highly unreliable.

For you to suggest that any of us need be limited to lesser weapons, such as a handgun, when many of the bad guys have better weapons, often illegally obtained, is absurd.

Of course, you can make yourself a sitting-duck if you want to.
You know I've lived in Manhattan more than 40 of my 50 or so years and not one time have I ever found myself in a position to need the use of a gun no less an AR 15 type weapon. You know, big bad NYC with all that "violence"? When in your life had you ever had the need to use a semi-automatic rifle? Do you live somewhere in America that civilians are not safe unless they carry AR type guns? It must suck to live in that sort of place.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

An AR15 is not even an assault rifle, and it doesn't matter if I "need" one or not. Just the fact that I want one, and am willing to buy it, will suffice as all the justification I (or anyone else) need.
Really? So if you wanted a bigger weapon of mass destruction that's OK in your world too? Afterall you have the right to protect yourself and if a rocket launcher is needed you should have the right to own it too, right?

Do you have some type of incredible fear that you're being threatened all the time and that only if you carry gun(s) you will be safe?

I don't get how so many people in this community are so afraid of being threatened? I can't relate to your fears....sorry.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Depending on what the job is, a handgun will get it done, depending on distance and numbers. That really doesn't matter though, when the discussion of gun ownership comes up. We don't have a 2nd amendment dependent on need, but dependent on the right to own and bear.

The SCOTUS ruling recently said that communities have the right to ban certain types of weapons that the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee carte blanche to own any type of gun. What are you so afraid of exactly?
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Really? So if you wanted a bigger weapon of mass destruction that's OK in your world too? Afterall you have the right to protect yourself and if a rocket launcher is needed you should have the right to own it too, right?

Do you have some type of incredible fear that you're being threatened all the time and that only if you carry gun(s) you will be safe?

I don't get how so many people in this community are so afraid of being threatened? I can't relate to your fears....sorry.

I'm guessing you have reading comprehension problems. Nowhere, did I say anything about being afraid or WMD. I simply stated that all I need is the desire and money to own one. It doesn't matter if I need it or not. I like guns. I like target shooting, and if I want an AR15, it doesn't matter if I need it or not. That's not what the second amendment is about.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

I'm guessing you have reading comprehension problems. Nowhere, did I say anything about being afraid or WMD. I simply stated that all I need is the desire and money to own one. It doesn't matter if I need it or not. I like guns. I like target shooting, and if I want an AR15, it doesn't matter if I need it or not. That's not what the second amendment is about.
Thank you for the Civics lesson but your logic confirmed what I wrote. You're saying that your 2nd Amendment rights allow you to own an AR 15, which for now is true. But your also saying that you can also own larger weapons if that's what's needed to defend yourself? What sport is there, exactly, please, in an AR 15 or other guns that are similar? Target shooting with semi automatic? It's like looking at the answers to a crossword puzzle as you're doing it....
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Thank you for the Civics lesson but your logic confirmed what I wrote. You're saying that your 2nd Amendment rights allow you to own an AR 15, which for now is true. But your also saying that you can also own larger weapons if that's what's needed to defend yourself? What sport is there, exactly, please, in an AR 15 or other guns that are similar? Target shooting with semi automatic? It's like looking at the answers to a crossword puzzle as you're doing it....

No, you are apparently still having comprehension problems. It's a very simple concept. I want an AR15, I have the money to buy one, I can own one. I can use it for any legal means, regardless of your assumption that I need it.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Some people seem to thing a hand gun will get the job done! Insert rolleyes

when faced with a predator armed with an AR... who do you think will fare better... an unarmed person, or a person armed with a handgun?
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

So what, you think we should have 11 armed guards at every school, university, shopping mall, movie cinema, post office, etc? Eventually well need those armed guards patrolling the streets then. I don't get how this is a solution.

Don't be absurd ! But if all the politicians can have armed guards for themselves and their kids, instead of a new law, then maybe they are onto something, dontcha think ? Have you seen the explosion of school administration in the past 20 years ? Graphs are in this thread ! Too bad it wasn't "for the children", eh ?

Now that we want it to be "for the children", the libs are all freaking out !! Why is that ?

I don't get how this is a solution

Yeah. No ****.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

An elderly vet was able to tackle the shooter in Arizona because he had to stop killing to change magazines.

I thought vets were untrustworthy?
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

You know I've lived in Manhattan more than 40 of my 50 or so years and not one time have I ever found myself in a position to need the use of a gun no less an AR 15 type weapon. You know, big bad NYC with all that "violence"? When in your life had you ever had the need to use a semi-automatic rifle? Do you live somewhere in America that civilians are not safe unless they carry AR type guns? It must suck to live in that sort of place.

Actually, I spent 7 years in the Military, where we are trained to confront the bad guys, as that is expected. So we use guns to do that. Follow me so far ?

Now, your argument seems to be that I will no longer ever confront bad guys again, so why be armed ? Heck, you haven't been so confronted in 40 years in NYC, so why worry, eh ?

Are you going to now tell me, and others, that there have been no good folks killed by the guns of bad folks in NYC in your 40 years ? You wanna bet that the murder-by-gun rate in NYC is worse than in my Florida County ? Even though you have not been shot at, or in a situation where a handgun was used to take from you ?

Sucks to be you. In more ways than you know.
 
Re: NRA Newtown response

Don't be absurd ! But if all the politicians can have armed guards for themselves and their kids, instead of a new law, then maybe they are onto something, dontcha think ? Have you seen the explosion of school administration in the past 20 years ? Graphs are in this thread ! Too bad it wasn't "for the children", eh ?

Now that we want it to be "for the children", the libs are all freaking out !! Why is that ?



Yeah. No ****.

It's absurd that the NRA is only responding because these were very small, little children. When it was a movie cinema and high schools, I guess the kids weren't young enough... the carnage wasn't bad enough. Why is the NRA only talking about protecting our children, and not about protecting everybody at cinemas and shopping malls as well?

Is it because they don't have any solutions to offer?
 
Back
Top Bottom