• 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!

Active gunmen in US navy Yard [W:69, 700]

Nice signature.

But you see I am free. I do not need to fight till the death for a right that will kill me neither? Why should you?

Kind of like telling us I don't need this type of gun or that type of gun for hunting/defense. Need does not figure into it. If you are free, as you say, and believe in freedom why are you trying to restrict my freedom.
 
What makes some of you that oppose my constitutional right to own a gun, so scared that I am going to use it on you? Unless you have some thought in your head that you plan on doing harm to me or my family, you literally have NO chance of even knowing that I have the weapon. It irrational, and quite paranoid. In fact, I'd say that you come into contact everyday more than once with a gun owner, or a CCW holder, and don't even know it.

Your argument is an appeal to emotion, and a falsehood on its very premise.

I am a abit under alcoholic influence I should admit at the mo! BHT!! And there is a great "BUT" in that!!! I NEVEWR consider that you will use it on me!!! Much less me use them on you. But I would rather pbliterate your oponents instead!!! Are we clear on this??!!

I just hate to see you shoot each other!!! THATS| all!!
 
Kind of like telling us I don't need this type of gun or that type of gun for hunting/defense. Need does not figure into it. If you are free, as you say, and believe in freedom why are you trying to restrict my freedom.

Cause I feel for you Mac!! Is it not obvious!!

There is something wrong with this!!

Not to mention that you give me too much emphasis. I cannot restrict your freedom even if I wanted to. And I would not want you to.
 
Cause I feel for you Mac!! Is it not obvious!!

There is something wrong with this!!

Not to mention that you give me too much emphasis. I cannot restrict your freedom even if I wanted to. And I would not want you to.

Well, thank you for that but, all the reason to make it at least as easy to get protection from the bad guys as the bad guys have it. All countries with gun control only help criminals, whether intended or not.
 
I am a abit under alcoholic influence I should admit at the mo! BHT!! And there is a great "BUT" in that!!! I NEVEWR consider that you will use it on me!!! Much less me use them on you. But I would rather pbliterate your oponents instead!!! Are we clear on this??!!

I just hate to see you shoot each other!!! THATS| all!!

You just let me worry about that. I am positive that I am more qualified to make that decision for myself. When I need a bleeding heart I'll let you know.
 
Well, thank you for that but, all the reason to make it at least as easy to get protection from the bad guys as the bad guys have it. All countries with gun control only help criminals, whether intended or not.

You just let me worry about that. I am positive that I am more qualified to make that decision for myself. When I need a bleeding heart I'll let you know.

Hi, yes, thanks for some time out. There should be a stated engagement protocol when a poster openly states that they are under alcoholic (or otherwise) influence. It should be similar to this (i.e., get back to them after a while. Presumably after the influence wares off).

By the way Mac, that is a great signature. Also, Mac and J-Mac (related? :) ) sorry about those posts and their emotional baggage. You know why I posted as such.

Now. Here is my position. Guns will never go away, period. But the responsibilities associated with carrying a deadly firearm should be indoctrinated to the users prior to issuing them a gun and/or license (so as to avoid the incident when teens shoot people irresponsibly for fun). Specifically you may model from other countries and associate the dangers that may come from such or accidental use (i.e., prison, retaliation, blood feud, basically all life ending for the worse, etc).

Secondly, some have intentions to abuse the power as soon as they can grasp their claws on a gun. Those would be: Psychopaths, sociopaths, and impulsive murderers. Just to make it harder on them I propose fMRI screening since their brain differs to a degree with the rest of us.

They then should not be allowed access to legal guns. They can get illegal guns but there is greater risks with that.

Thanks again.
DDD
 
Hi, yes, thanks for some time out. There should be a stated engagement protocol when a poster openly states that they are under alcoholic (or otherwise) influence. It should be similar to this (i.e., get back to them after a while. Presumably after the influence wares off).

By the way Mac, that is a great signature. Also, Mac and J-Mac (related? :) ) sorry about those posts and their emotional baggage. You know why I posted as such.

Now. Here is my position. Guns will never go away, period. But the responsibilities associated with carrying a deadly firearm should be indoctrinated to the users prior to issuing them a gun and/or license (so as to avoid the incident when teens shoot people irresponsibly for fun). Specifically you may model from other countries and associate the dangers that may come from such or accidental use (i.e., prison, retaliation, blood feud, basically all life ending for the worse, etc).

Secondly, some have intentions to abuse the power as soon as they can grasp their claws on a gun. Those would be: Psychopaths, sociopaths, and impulsive murderers. Just to make it harder on them I propose fMRI screening since their brain differs to a degree with the rest of us.

They then should not be allowed access to legal guns. They can get illegal guns but there is greater risks with that.

Thanks again.
DDD

The bold used to be thoroughly addressed by parents and schools until anti-gun movement and political correctness and one of the original purposes of the NRA, IIRC - to facilitate.

I agree somewhat with screening except that is a tricky privacy rights problem and too new a theory of fMRI to implement for a 2nd Amendment right. My opinion is it needs more peer review and further retesting.

Oh and I used to get briefly confused when I saw j-mac, but not the same person however if memory is correct we are both pro-gun.
Thanks on the sig - religion has wrecked more lives than anything in my opinion. It has its usefulness though, but, that's another topic. And the Patriot Act was anything but.
 
The bold used to be thoroughly addressed by parents and schools until anti-gun movement and political correctness and one of the original purposes of the NRA, IIRC - to facilitate.

I agree somewhat with screening except that is a tricky privacy rights problem and too new a theory of fMRI to implement for a 2nd Amendment right. My opinion is it needs more peer review and further retesting.

Oh and I used to get briefly confused when I saw j-mac, but not the same person however if memory is correct we are both pro-gun.
Thanks on the sig - religion has wrecked more lives than anything in my opinion. It has its usefulness though, but, that's another topic. And the Patriot Act was anything but.

Correct, we are both pro gun.
 
The bold used to be thoroughly addressed by parents and schools until anti-gun movement and political correctness and one of the original purposes of the NRA, IIRC - to facilitate.

We indoctrinate the dangers of gun use to that degree that I recall it was very scary to be exposed, look, and even just hold a gun for all the negative life aspects it was related to. Much less aim!!! Shoot???!!!! Noway! Not at near proximity!

I agree somewhat with screening except that is a tricky privacy rights problem and too new a theory of fMRI to implement for a 2nd Amendment right. My opinion is it needs more peer review and further retesting.

I expect that it will have more peer reviews and further testing. It is there and there is a lot that it could be done with the technology.

Thanks on the sig - religion has wrecked more lives than anything in my opinion. It has its usefulness though, but, that's another topic. And the Patriot Act was anything but.

Religion sucks! If they only would resort to being in peace with it and keep it for themselves! But nuuuuuuu, they have to want and pressure others to have them too!! They want power, they want a seat in the parties, government, etc! Freaking middle aged dinosaurs man!

As for the Patriot Act, any chance you could remove the act somehow since it bothers you so much? I mean, it is not the case that it thereby has been written in the constitution or so!
 
We indoctrinate the dangers of gun use to that degree that I recall it was very scary to be exposed, look, and even just hold a gun for all the negative life aspects it was related to. Much less aim!!! Shoot???!!!! Noway! Not at near proximity!

Are you that scared of hammers as well?

I expect that it will have more peer reviews and further testing. It is there and there is a lot that it could be done with the technology.

There is a long way to go before the technology is reliable enough to use against peoples rights.

Religion sucks! If they only would resort to being in peace with it and keep it for themselves! But nuuuuuuu, they have to want and pressure others to have them too!! They want power, they want a seat in the parties, government, etc! Freaking middle aged dinosaurs man!

To each his own...Funny though how the animosity, and vitriol often comes from those without religion in their lives.

As for the Patriot Act, any chance you could remove the act somehow since it bothers you so much? I mean, it is not the case that it thereby has been written in the constitution or so!

Nope, it is every bit ingrained now, just like what progressives want for Obamacare. Once in place, good luck removing it.
 
Are you that scared of hammers as well?

Mind the tone and read J-Mac, read! I was proposing indoctrination to young (yet to be issued guns to) people (e.g., late teenagers). How do I freaking sound teenage to you?!

There is a long way to go before the technology is reliable enough to use against peoples rights.

But it is getting there.

To each his own...Funny though how the animosity, and vitriol often comes from those without religion in their lives.

To each his own indeed. But at least with us it stays there only with speech. The religious on the other hand speak less and use guns more to their stated "divine causes."

Nope, it is every bit ingrained now, just like what progressives want for Obamacare. Once in place, good luck removing it.

It is not as ingrained as the constitution is it? Instead of luck there should be effort removing it if people do not like it. Why would electing leaders to remove the PATRIOT act not work?
 
Mind the tone and read J-Mac, read!

:lamo "Mind the tone"? Oh that's rich....Who do you think you are anyway? :roll:

I was proposing indoctrination to young (yet to be issued guns to) people (e.g., late teenagers). How do I freaking sound teenage to you?!

Now you are making up arguments....I never said you sounded like a teenager, just a misguided liberal. Talk about learning to read gheeze....It was a simple question....'Are you scared of hammers too?'

But it is getting there.

So you do want to take away peoples rights....Thanks for admitting that.

To each his own indeed. But at least with us it stays there only with speech. The religious on the other hand speak less and use guns more to their stated "divine causes."

:lamo Baseless claim....Show me in the US where "the religious" are using guns "to their stated "divine causes"....

It is not as ingrained as the constitution is it? Instead of luck there should be effort removing it if people do not like it. Why would electing leaders to remove the PATRIOT act not work?

Good, so you support Ted Cruz right?
 
:lamo "Mind the tone"? Oh that's rich....Who do you think you are anyway? :roll:

Now you are making up arguments....I never said you sounded like a teenager, just a misguided liberal. Talk about learning to read gheeze....It was a simple question....'Are you scared of hammers too?'

So you do want to take away peoples rights....Thanks for admitting that.

:lamo Baseless claim....Show me in the US where "the religious" are using guns "to their stated "divine causes"....

Good, so you support Ted Cruz right?

Should be that emotional post where I clearly stated that I think of you as highly that makes you believe that now you can piss down on me and degrade the otherwise good debate into smut fest. Well, so long J-Mac :2wave: . I have another Mac so seeing you ignored would not cost me a thing.

Tung.
 
Should be that emotional post where I clearly stated that I think of you as highly that makes you believe that now you can piss down on me and degrade the otherwise good debate into smut fest. Well, so long J-Mac :2wave: . I have another Mac so seeing you ignored would not cost me a thing.

Tung.

:2wave: Doesn't cost me a thing....Have fun.
 
Back
Top Bottom