• 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]

mexico's gun problems seem more a byproduct of a weak govt and state. For example, Japan has some of the strictest gun laws in the world and hardly no gun crime. But they have a very strong state and functional govt

They also don't have a border with another country supplying some of the guns.

I keep hearing Mexico government is weak but they are doing what they can to stop this.
New rules were just instituted for money laundering.

If you move $2000.00 dollars or more or the equilivant in pesos through your account you will be investigated.

We are talking about money already in the bank.

Mexico is trying but it is like dealing with a local versión of terrorists on your own land.
 
who said it was? I was responding to the comment about strict gun control inevitably leading to a scenario akin to what mexico is experiences. Secondly, I think the control issue here would go more along the lines of a japan than a mexico, for obvious reasons.



I would rather deal with a guy wielding a knife than a gun, in most scenarios.
Do you base that on ANYTHING other than your fairy tale desire for it to be so? We have bans on drugs, extremely high sentences, three strikes laws...and yet...we still have HUGE problems with both illegal drugs AND illegal possession and use of guns. But...passing a ban on GUNS...THAT would be different. Somehow. Sure...sure...thats the ticket.
 
No, removing someone's ability to acquire a gun legally would clearly limit their ability to buy guns.

You obviously don't understand how easy it is to buy a gun on the street.
 
Nope, you're right. And all of them, whether D or R, would not be denied access to such a facility. So when the question is asked about how a felon would get access, the easy answer is that in some cases we elect them. For that matter, former Senator Jim Webb was caught carrying a revolver into the Senate - I was busted on that once in that his aide was the one actually carrying it for him - soooo, Bwana has a gun bearer.....

Was the shooter a Congressman?

I hadn't Heard that.
 
:lamo Addressing your comments is a 'kneejerk' reaction.

No, you going on some nonsensical tirade that doesn't even address what i wrote is a knee jerk reaction. if you actually addressed my comments then such wouldn't be a problem

I get it. Your kind of foolishness only stands on its own if it is COMPLETELY unchallenged.

No, you certainly don't seem to be "getting" anything at this point

I certianly understand why you want it to remain that way.

ok?

My points very directly addressed your Japanese connection or more importantly...the COMPLETE lack of valid connection

No, they really didn't. My point was that a country can initiate successful gun control measure, in response to people suggesting they could not. Clearly the situation in Japan proves this to be true.

It DID however COMPLETELY point to the FACT...gangs...violent criminals..even on Japan where gun ownership carries massive fines and gun use can carry a life sentence...GANGS manage to get and use guns.

right, but apparently in very limited numbers. So being that no one suggested such levels of control will prevent any and all gun crime, I am a little lost on what you are trying to address ...
 
You obviously don't understand how easy it is to buy a gun on the street.

I can usually score a sack of weed in most cities in under a half hour if i put my mind to it, but never seen any signs that guns were similarly accessible. The same is true with most countries Ive been to over seas.

So I would disagree with the claim that buying a black market gun is easy
 
I would rather deal with a guy wielding a knife than a gun, in most scenarios.

Then you would lose...

"The number cited for rifles was somewhat less precise. While it’s true that the FBI counted 323 murders by rifles, the agency also counted 1,587 murders by an undetermined type of firearm and 97 by "other guns." If gun usage in these two categories followed the same pattern as other gun homicides, that would add another 75 or so murders by rifle, making an estimate for the number of rifle murders about 400, rather than 323.

Still, the larger point holds: Murders by knives, blunt objects and body parts each individually outweighed those committed using a rifle."

PolitiFact | Facebook post says more people were murdered with knives, body parts or blunt objects than with rifles
 
Do you base that on ANYTHING other than your fairy tale desire for it to be so?

Yes, the fact that we have a strong central govt


We have bans on drugs, extremely high sentences, three strikes laws...and yet...we still have HUGE problems with both illegal drugs AND illegal possession and use of guns.

Are you really suggesting the economics around guns is similar to drugs?


But...passing a ban on GUNS...THAT would be different.

yes, because guns are different than drugs. In fact, pot is much easier to get than a gun in japan
 
No, you going on some nonsensical tirade that doesn't even address what i wrote is a knee jerk reaction. if you actually addressed my comments then such wouldn't be a problem



No, you certainly don't seem to be "getting" anything at this point



ok?



No, they really didn't. My point was that a country can initiate successful gun control measure, in response to people suggesting they could not. Clearly the situation in Japan proves this to be true.



right, but apparently in very limited numbers. So being that no one suggested such levels of control will prevent any and all gun crime, I am a little lost on what you are trying to address ...
Very directly addressing your comparison of the US and Japan is to you a nonsensical tirade? Well...considering the stupidity of your argument...I can certainly see why you take that position.
 
who said it was? I was responding to the comment about strict gun control inevitably leading to a scenario akin to what mexico is experiences. Secondly, I think the control issue here would go more along the lines of a japan than a mexico, for obvious reasons.
The point was that what works in other places is not necessarily applicable here. We have vast open spaces here.



I would rather deal with a guy wielding a knife than a gun, in most scenarios.
I would too, depending on the knife. Truthfully, I'd rather not have to deal with either of them, or any of the other means by which a person might attempt to inflict harm. Of course, if I were to happen to have a gun myself, and I do, I would not feel quite so threatened. And, by golly, I don't. A friend of mine once gave me this particularly large and menacing machete, and I'd be willing to bet I could kill as many with it as that nut did with fire arms. No kidding. It'd be absolutely gruesome and the entire country would react with justifiable horror.
 
Yes, the fact that we have a strong central govt




Are you really suggesting the economics around guns is similar to drugs?




yes, because guns are different than drugs. In fact, pot is much easier to get than a gun in japan
We have a strong central government NOW and both guns AND drugs are easily obtained. And hell yes I compare the two. Incidents of mass shootings in this country are by comparison to legal gun ownership BEYOND extraordinarily rare. However the VAST MAJORITY of crimes, shootings, murders in this country are committed by gangs and violent felons and revolve around the drug trade. You know...that drug trade that is banned by that strong central government.
 
Then you would lose...

"The number cited for rifles was somewhat less precise. While it’s true that the FBI counted 323 murders by rifles, the agency also counted 1,587 murders by an undetermined type of firearm and 97 by "other guns." If gun usage in these two categories followed the same pattern as other gun homicides, that would add another 75 or so murders by rifle, making an estimate for the number of rifle murders about 400, rather than 323.

Still, the larger point holds: Murders by knives, blunt objects and body parts each individually outweighed those committed using a rifle."

PolitiFact | Facebook post says more people were murdered with knives, body parts or blunt objects than with rifles

How does that address my point? This is what keeps making me laugh, you guy keep attempting to address arguments I never made. Example: how would that statistic prove knives were more deadly than guns? and if knives are so much more deadly, then why do militaries arm their soldiers with a gun as a primary weapon, as opposed to blades?

secondly, you ignored this part: "We should note that while the Facebook post’s comparison is accurate as far as it goes, it does ignore the single biggest category of weapons used in murders -- handguns. Handguns were used in 6,220 cases, or 72 percent of all firearm murders in 2011 and slightly under half of all murders using any kind of weapon that year."
 
I can usually score a sack of weed in most cities in under a half hour if i put my mind to it, but never seen any signs that guns were similarly accessible. The same is true with most countries Ive been to over seas.

So I would disagree with the claim that buying a black market gun is easy

You were talking to drug dealers...not gun runners. Pick up anrwspaper and you'll see plenty of guns for sale.
 
I have a question, Did Aaron Alexis break the law Yesterday?
Since he did, why does anyone think he would care about any of the other laws
he may have broken.
 
We have a strong central government NOW and both guns AND drugs are easily obtained.

They are? It's certainly not impossible to get an il;legal gun, but I'm not sure it's easy, either.

And hell yes I compare the two.

Well, it makes no sense because they act fundamentally differently in trade and use


Incidents of mass shootings in this country are by comparison to legal gun ownership BEYOND extraordinarily rare.

that doesn't address anything I wrote

However the VAST MAJORITY of crimes, shootings, murders in this country are committed by gangs and violent felons and revolve around the drug trade. You know...that drug trade that is banned by that strong central government.

Yeah, we just covered how the drug and gun trade are different.
 
You were talking to drug dealers...not gun runners. Pick up anrwspaper and you'll see plenty of guns for sale.

So people sell illegal guns in newspapers?
 
Was the shooter a Congressman?

I hadn't Heard that.
No, but when you ask how a felon can get a clearance, I'm telling you it's not that hard. It all depends on who you are, what you may be looking at, and the security level of the facility. A person working for a contractor in a lower security facility does not get the same level of scrutiny in many cases as most would assume. You would be surprised at how few honest Americans would pass a rigorous security review.
 
How does that address my point? This is what keeps making me laugh, you guy keep attempting to address arguments I never made. Example: how would that statistic prove knives were more deadly than guns? and if knives are so much more deadly, then why do militaries arm their soldiers with a gun as a primary weapon, as opposed to blades?

Actually, the military arms their soldiers with both....Ever heard of a bayonet?

secondly, you ignored this part: "We should note that while the Facebook post’s comparison is accurate as far as it goes, it does ignore the single biggest category of weapons used in murders -- handguns. Handguns were used in 6,220 cases, or 72 percent of all firearm murders in 2011 and slightly under half of all murders using any kind of weapon that year."

uh huh...And you ignore this part...

"Our ruling

The post uses data selectively, ignoring the significant role of handguns in gun violence. But the statistics it mentions are solid. FBI data backs up the Facebook post’s claim that in 2011, more people were murdered with knives, "hands or feet" or "clubs and hammers" than with any type of rifle. We rate the statement True."

mmmmmk?
 
I would too, depending on the knife. Truthfully, I'd rather not have to deal with either of them, or any of the other means by which a person might attempt to inflict harm. Of course, if I were to happen to have a gun myself, and I do, I would not feel quite so threatened.

hey, man I own guns myself and have absolutely no problem with them. I'm just addressing some hilariously bad arguments here (like knives are more deadly than guns).
 
They are? It's certainly not impossible to get an il;legal gun, but I'm not sure it's easy, either.



Well, it makes no sense because they act fundamentally differently in trade and use




that doesn't address anything I wrote



Yeah, we just covered how the drug and gun trade are different.
No...you completely ignored that in fact the gun and drug trade are very definitely intertwined (ever hear of the BATF) because it doesnt fit our silly arguments...arguments that get more and more foolish with each post.

https://www.google.com/#q=gangs+drugs+guns
 
Actually, the military arms their soldiers with both....Ever heard of a bayonet?

I thought I was pretty clear in my post, but let me repost the relevant material "***arm their soldiers with a gun as a primary weapon***, as opposed to blades?".

Are you saying those bayanets are their "primary" weapons?

The post uses data selectively, ignoring the significant role of handguns in gun violence. But the statistics it mentions are solid. FBI data backs up the Facebook post’s claim that in 2011, more people were murdered with knives, "hands or feet" or "clubs and hammers" than with any type of rifle. We rate the statement True."

How does that address my argument? And going by your logic "hands and fists" would be more deadly than a shotgun.
 
hey, man I own guns myself and have absolutely no problem with them. I'm just addressing some hilariously bad arguments here (like knives are more deadly than guns).

Ever hear of The Crusades?
 
Back
Top Bottom