• 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]

VanceMack said:
GUN CONTROL has not been effective in stopping violent crimes. INCREASING SENTENCES has been shown to be effective in other places.
Click to expand...

I have pointed out why this is a distinction without a difference a few times already. Ignoring that doesn't make that problem just disappear


In THIS country, gun control laws without enforcement have been shown to be ineffective.
Click to expand...

Well, among other things, yes, weak legislation is pretty much worthless


And yet, a whole group of mindless morons advocate for more of the same. More gun laws meant to target law abiding citizens. When it comes to actually targeting the violent criminals? Crickets.
Click to expand...

In like my last five posts I have been clear that I support increased penalties ....


See...I think you are full of **** personally.
Click to expand...

So, unlike me, you don't support increased penalties?


I think you cant come right and say what you mean because at the end of the day, you are no different than tres goofus.
Click to expand...

I just did explain exactly what I meant:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-67.html#post1062333172

it was actually a response to a question you asked and a post you even quoted. So surely you didn't miss it and can only assume that you are in fact fundamentally confused.

You want more inane ineffective gun laws passed knowing full well they will never impact criminals...only law abiding citizens.
Click to expand...

So what exactly are you taking issue with, my support for harsher penalties or ending the lax oversight in P2P sales?
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I have pointed out why this is a distinction without a difference a few times already. Ignoring that doesn't make that problem just disappear




Well, among other things, yes, weak legislation is pretty much worthless




In like my last five posts I have been clear that I support increased penalties ....




So, unlike me, you don't support increased penalties?




I just did explain exactly what I meant:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-67.html#post1062333172

it was actually a response to a question you asked and a post you even quoted. So surely you didn't miss it and can only assume that you are in fact fundamentally confused.



So what exactly are you taking issue with, my support for harsher penalties or ending the lax oversight in P2P sales?
Click to expand...
I gotcha. You weighed in to this thread and took to post 701 to say that REALLY...you were just all for increased sentences for criminals using guns in the commission of a violent crime. Thats what you REALLY meant from the get go. I gotcha...
 
VanceMack said:
I gotcha. You weighed in to this thread and took to post 701 to say that REALLY...you were just all for increased sentences for criminals using guns in the commission of a violent crime.
Click to expand...

1) Why would I mention my position on new gun legislation when I was discussing arguments like "knives are more deadly than guns" and "gun laws do not restrict availability"?

2) During those discussion I made clear I *did not * support excessive changes to current legislation

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-62.html#post1062332942

<<<No, I acknowledge simple facts "like laws restrict availability" and that "guns are more deadly than knives". That doesn't mean I support the introduction of new and extensive gun control measures. >>>

lol ...




Thats what you REALLY meant from the get go. I gotcha...[/QUOTE]
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
1) Why would I mention my position on new gun legislation when I was discussing arguments like "knives are more deadly than guns" and "gun laws do not restrict availability"?

2) During those discussion I made clear I *did not * support excessive changes to current legislation

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-62.html#post1062332942

<<<No, I acknowledge simple facts "like laws restrict availability" and that "guns are more deadly than knives". That doesn't mean I support the introduction of new and extensive gun control measures. >>>

lol ...




Thats what you REALLY meant from the get go. I gotcha...
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]And you STILL cant see that 'gun laws' are not restricting availability. Thats simply a fact. Violent crime rates in inner cities prove it. The 'extensive' black market cited in the PBS article proves it. The fact that in the DC, Sandy Hook, Aurora Co, Phoneix Az, Va Tech, and other shooting happened WITH those gun control measures in place proves it.

Want change? Go after the criminals using existing laws and then put them away for an extraordinarily long time. Spread the word. You will see change.
 
And you STILL cant see that 'gun laws' are not restricting availability.[/quote]

You just got done saying increased penalties helped restrict availability in japan ...

Thats simply a fact. Violent crime rates in inner cities prove it. The 'extensive' black market cited in the PBS article proves it.
Click to expand...

You mean the articles you posted that outline laxed oversight over P2P sales? I already addressed this numerous times:

<<<2) the links from you and dittohead paint the issue as mainly being dependent on weak regulations fueling legal, though questionable, transactions. So, again, as an argument that easily accessible black market guns are the consequence of heavy regulation (which was the argument I was addressing) it leaves something to be desired>>>

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-50.html#post1062331069


The fact that in the DC, Sandy Hook, Aurora Co, Phoneix Az, Va Tech, and other shooting happened WITH those gun control measures in place proves it.
Click to expand...

Except YOU have pointed out instances where gun legislation has restricted access. Based on YOUR evidence, what we can conclude is that current legislation isn't working, not that legislation doesn't work (again, it is YOUR evidence that shows this)


Want change? Go after the criminals using existing laws and then put them away for an extraordinarily long time. Spread the word. You will see change.
Click to expand...

lol

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-71.html#post1062333626
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
And you STILL cant see that 'gun laws' are not restricting availability
Click to expand...
Quite to the contrary...I showed where even with gun legislation in place, criminals were importing illegal weapons by the caseload. You are extraordinarily selective in your interpretations. Gun control legislation DID NOT WORK (this is circular...we've been here before). Massive prison sentence increases to those existing laws DID work. Fear of going away for a very very VERY long time. Speeding laws dont stop people from speeding. Charging $50 per MPH over the speed limit does. No new laws...better enforcement of existing laws and increased penalties. And...thats a wrap.
 
VanceMack said:
Quite to the contrary...I showed where even with gun legislation in place, criminals were importing illegal weapons by the caseload.
Click to expand...

1) Pointing out restrictive legislation can be effective isn't the same as the argument "all restrictive legislation is effective'

2) Your link indicates they were smuggling "300 guns at a time". That isn't a large number of guns, nor does it do much to indicate they were freely available, even within the Yakuza


You are extraordinarily selective in your interpretations. Gun control legislation DID NOT WORK (this is circular...we've been here before).
Click to expand...

Again, you're making a distinction without a difference: legal penalties are an aspect of legislation. If increased legal penalties have deterred gun availability, then legislation has reduced availability. It doesn't matter some forms of legislation are ineffective, because according to your sources proper legislation can be. Thus, we disprove your previous claim, that legislation CAN NOT reduce availability ...


Ignoring this line of logic doesn't make it go a way

Massive prison sentence increases to those existing laws DID work. Fear of going away for a very very VERY long time. Speeding laws dont stop people from speeding. Charging $50 per MPH over the speed limit does. No new laws...better enforcement of existing laws and increased penalties. And...thats a wrap.
Click to expand...

changing legal penalties would be changing current law ...
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
1) Why would I mention my position on new gun legislation when I was discussing arguments like "knives are more deadly than guns" and "gun laws do not restrict availability"?

2) During those discussion I made clear I *did not * support excessive changes to current legislation

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-62.html#post1062332942

<<<No, I acknowledge simple facts "like laws restrict availability" and that "guns are more deadly than knives". That doesn't mean I support the introduction of new and extensive gun control measures. >>>

lol ...




Thats what you REALLY meant from the get go. I gotcha...
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Laws only restrict honest people because criminals don't follow laws.

I'm curious as to how you feel about our drug laws?
 
ChrisL said:
Laws only restrict honest people because criminals don't follow laws.

I'm curious as to how you feel about our drug laws?
Click to expand...

it's a point I have addressed a dozen times here.

In fact, here is me referencing the fact that You even thanked another poster for providing material that shows gun restrictions lead to limited access, even for criminals. So I am lost on why you want me to address the same thing over and over again ...


http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-67.html#post1062333214

PS you might find this helpful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
it's a point I have addressed a dozen times here.

In fact, here is me referencing the fact that You even thanked another poster for providing material that shows gun restrictions lead to limited access, even for criminals. So I am lost on why you want me to address the same thing over and over again ...


http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-navy-yard-w-69-700-a-67.html#post1062333214

PS you might find this helpful:

Proof by assertion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Nope, I asked you a direct question. There is no reason to post links. Now why are you so frightened to answer a question directly? How do you feel about the drug laws in the United States?
 
ChrisL said:
Because I don't know your position and I'm asking.
Click to expand...

And I answered

What is the big deal about answering questions with you anyway?
Click to expand...

from above : "As I said, it's a question I've answered numerous times"


What is wrong with you?
Click to expand...

Nothing. Why do you ask?

Why do you keep posting that same link?
Click to expand...

They are not the same link. I just went back and checked them to make sure.

Did it ever cross your mind to actually click on them?
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Why would you think the drug trade would be similar to a gun trade? Let us look at it on a practical level. In Japan, extacy, amphetamines, marijuana, cocaine and LSD are all widely available. Guns are not.

Both are illegal and heavily regulated. But clearly in economic terms, drugs behave differently on the black market than do guns.

1) profitable amounts of drugs are small and easy to transport.

2) Users use drugs and continue to use drugs on a regular basis. Guaranteeing a ready market for anything you bring in. Guns are not used as regularly, nor do they cease to be when used.

3) the market is naturally smaller for illegal guns than drugs
Click to expand...

Drugs are widely available on the black market because they are illegal and therefore lucrative. The same is going to happen with guns with the more laws that are put into place. THAT is how the black market operates. What on earth makes you think it will turn out any differently with guns? People can even manufacture guns, and it's quite simple if you know what you're doing.

Also, the more gun laws and restrictions, the more other types of weapons which are even MORE destructive are going to become popular, like bombs which are also relatively easy to put together if you know what you're doing.

Man, you are SO incapable of seeing the bigger picture and unintended consequences. I don't think you're quite as smart as you seem to think you are.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
And I answered



from above : "As I said, it's a question I've answered numerous times"




Nothing. Why do you ask?



They are not the same link. I just went back and checked them to make sure.

Did it ever cross your mind to actually click on them?
Click to expand...

And BTW, you STILL haven't stated your position on how you feel about the drug war in America. You made some general comments but have not clarified your own position, which is what I specifically asked about.
 
ChrisL said:
Drugs are widely available on the black market because they are illegal and therefore lucrative. The same is going to happen with guns with the more laws that are put into place. THAT is how the black market operates. What on earth makes you think it will turn out any differently with guns? People can even manufacture guns, and it's quite simple if you know what you're doing.
Click to expand...

Ugh, you're actually quoting a post where I explain "What on earth makes me think it will turn out differently" ...


[/quote]Also, the more gun laws and restrictions, the more other types of weapons which are even MORE destructive are going to become popular, like bombs which are also relatively easy to put together if you know what you're doing.[/quote]

Unfortunately i don't think crime statistics in Japan mirror such a phenomenon. Are you familiar with any such example that you can point to?


Man, you are SO incapable of seeing the bigger picture and unintended consequences. I don't think you're quite as smart as you seem to think you are.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I will take that into consideration.
 
ChrisL said:
And BTW, you STILL haven't stated your position on how you feel about the drug war in America. You made some general comments but have not clarified your own position, which is what I specifically asked about.
Click to expand...

how is it relevant?
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Ugh, you're actually quoting a post where I explain "What on earth makes me think it will turn out differently" ...
Click to expand...
Also, the more gun laws and restrictions, the more other types of weapons which are even MORE destructive are going to become popular, like bombs which are also relatively easy to put together if you know what you're doing.[/quote]

Unfortunately i don't think crime statistics in Japan mirror such a phenomenon. Are you familiar with any such example that you can point to?




Thanks, I will take that into consideration.[/QUOTE]

Like I said earlier, Japan is not comparable to the U.S. Only an idiot would compare us with the tiny island that is Japan.
 
ChrisL said:
Like I said earlier, Japan is not comparable to the U.S. Only an idiot would compare us with the tiny island that is Japan.
Click to expand...

1) Do you understand how to construct an argument? FYI, it consists of more than simply making loud noises and going "Nu-uh"

2) Second, you're argument was that legislative restrictions won't limit access to fire arms and that if such restrictions do work (though you assure us such is impossible) that people would simply turn to more deadly devices like bombs. To counter that I don't need to compare the US to japan (which is why I never actually did such), only point out that both your assertions were proven wrong with legislation introduced in Japan (<~~~~~see, no comparison)

3) Why do you think such controls could be introduced in japan but not the US?
 
I've already explained the fact that because drugs are ILLEGAL and you cannot obtain them legally, it makes for a strong black market. The same thing will happen with guns here in America. The criminals are NOT going to just say, "oh well, I guess I can't have guns because it's illegal for me to have one." :roll: They will find a way to get them regardless. And yes, if guns were ever outlawed, that would CERTAINLY strengthen the black market for them.

We are not Japan. We are not an island nation. Our borders are NOT secure. We have a MUCH bigger population and our Constitutional rights make us unique.

A VERY interesting perspective here. I encourage you all to read this.

The Layman’s Guide to Black Market Firearms

An excerpt:

So here’s the bottom line on what you need to know about the black market. If enough people want an item or a service and are willing to pay for it, other people are going to provide it whether it’s legal or not. Drugs, gambling, prostitution, you name it. Those things have been around since before recorded history, by the way, they’re with us still, and they always will be because there are enough people who want those services that the cash rewards are worth it to the criminals.

Personal and parental responsibility is the only way to reduce firearm-related tragedy. Ladies and Gentlemen of America: Do you love your children? If the firearm issue is an important one to you, then the best thing you can ever do will be to take a gun safety course with your child. When you’re dealing with something like a weapon, your best course is to obtain knowledge and understanding, not trying to make the problem magically go away by passing meaningless laws that aren’t prosecuted. Talk to your local State’s Attorneys and make it clear to them that you want gun-related crime like armed robberies and the like prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Adding more laws that don’t work to the already existing thousands that are not enforced is like smoke in the wind. Our children are too precious to waste any more time on "solutions" that don’t work.
Click to expand...
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque

also, if you would actually read what is posted here you would know you're barking up the wrong tree
Click to expand...

It's quite obvious that you can't answer a simple question, so I'm not wasting any more of my time on the likes of you. You are approaching this in a rather trollish manner.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
1) Do you understand how to construct an argument? FYI, it consists of more than simply making loud noises and going "Nu-uh"
Click to expand...

I think you should take your own advice. My arguments have made perfect sense, when you cannot even answer simple questions. You are obviously trolling for attention.

2) Second, you're argument was that legislative restrictions won't limit access to fire arms and that if such restrictions do work (though you assure us such is impossible) that people would simply turn to more deadly devices like bombs. To counter that I don't need to compare the US to japan (which is why I never actually did such), only point out that both your assertions were proven wrong with legislation introduced in Japan (<~~~~~see, no comparison)
Click to expand...

Again, you don't understand the issues apparently. Your comparing anything about us with Japan is retarded.

3) Why do you think such controls could be introduced in japan but not the US?
Click to expand...

Who cares? This is the United States of America, and we have constitutional rights. We are NOT Japan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom