• 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!

Shot NYPD cop dies

Another dodge... what is "more control" what does that mean, specifically?

What do you do with legal gun owners now?

It's such a simple question that your ilk always seem to have trouble answering.

What dodge ? :roll:

Your criminals are getting their weapons via legal gun owners in the first place as no doubt did the perp in the OP. Tracking and monitoring firearms would at least be a start including far more stringent background checks. Making firearms considerably more expensive wouldn't be a bad idea either. You doubtless aren't even prepared to countenance even these very minor changes
 
Your criminals are getting their weapons via legal gun owners in the first place as no doubt did the perp in the OP. Tracking and monitoring firearms would at least be a start including far more stringent background checks. Making firearms considerably more expensive wouldn't be a bad idea either. You doubtless aren't even prepared to countenance even these very minor changes



Tracking and monitoring with background checks? we already do that. how do you want them to be "more stringent" specifically?

"Making guns more expensive"? so it this so only rich white people like me can afford them?

What would any of these things do to the current market especially the used and black (illegal) market (which are to completely separate things.)?
 
Tracking and monitoring with background checks? we already do that. how do you want them to be "more stringent" specifically?

No you don't. Its far too easy for a criminal to get a gun from a legal gun owner with no questions asked. I suspect such transactions take place hundreds or maybe even thousands of times every day

"Making guns more expensive"? so it this so only rich white people like me can afford them?

Or that the criminals can't

What would any of these things do to the current market especially the used and black (illegal) market (which are to completely separate things.)?

Unless you cut off this market from its original legal sources by making those sources more expensive and more highly regulated then there will be nothing you can do. There clearly isn't the political will to do that so the killing will continue.

The plain fact is you guys don't really want to countenance the implications of such a solution and are prepared to pay the price in blood for the continuance of this lethal fetish as long as that blood isn't yours. It is an attitude that is both morally and ethically repugnant :(
 
Last edited:
No you don't. Its far too easy for a criminal to get a gun from a legal gun owner with no questions asked. I suspect such transactions take place hundreds or maybe even thousands of times every day

So no answer?

I didn;t think so, just more speculation and fear peddling.

Or that the criminals can't


Because criminals ALWAYS pay! and when they do they pay RETAIL! /facepalm


Unless you cut off this market from its original legal sources by making those sources more expensive and more highly regulated then there will be nothing you can do. There clearly isn't the political will to do that so the killing will continue.


So you still can't answer "more regulated". you can't speak to your plan or idea of what to do with the millions of legal gun owners property. you speak in empty platitudes.


The plain fact is you guys are prepared to pay the price in blood for the continuance of this lethal this fetish as long as that blood isn't yours :(


images




As usual, your ilk, has no spine to say what they really want to do.


BTW, you aren't anti-gun, you are very pro-gun because you are going to need government agents with guns to come after mine.... we all know you won't come, you'll send others.
 
So no answer?
I didn;t think so, just more speculation and fear peddling.

Am I wrong then ?

Because criminals ALWAYS pay! and when they do they pay RETAIL! /facepalm

I seriously doubt that given the criminal fraternity are normally from the less affluent part of the social spectrum

So you still can't answer "more regulated". you can't speak to your plan or idea of what to do with the millions of legal gun owners property. you speak in empty platitudes.

More regulated means less guns and far more stringent vetting of owners and those in their households too.

As usual, your ilk, has no spine to say what they really want to do.

As usual your ilk has no spine to admit why they really have these weapons, when some have arsenals that would defeat a Zulu onslaught. How great must be your personal 'inadequacies' that you need these sorts of compensations

BTW, you aren't anti-gun, you are very pro-gun because you are going to need government agents with guns to come after mine.... we all know you won't come, you'll send others.

Uh huh....

'Go ahead punk 'make my day' ....right :lol:
 
The facts differ.

In Europe gun killings are around 40 - 50 times lower per capita than the US due to far more stringent gun control. Police shootings are as a consequence very rare

Again, with the politically invented gun killing number, adjust homicide you're at best 3 times lower, which tracks historically for the last century regardless of gun legislation.

But that doesn't sound as dramatic now does it?
 
Am I wrong then ?


Stop trying to steer the conversation away from that which you cannot or won't answer.



I seriously doubt that given the criminal fraternity are normally from the less affluent part of the social spectrum


The "criminal fraternity" you say.

so drug dealers don't make fast cash?

Really?


More regulated means less guns and far more stringent vetting of owners and those in their households too.

Empty rhetoric, how will you make there "less guns"?

so who can't I live with specifically in your world that would make me not able to own a gun?


As usual your ilk has no spine to admit why they really have these weapons, when some have arsenals that would defeat a Zulu onslaught. How great must be your personal 'inadequacies' that you need these sorts of compensations


Oddly, the only time I was a mortal danger to others with a gun in my hand was when I worked for the government. *shrug*


yes, the gun is obviously my penis. will the stupidity ever end?


I have guns to,

1. prevent tyranny in government
2. self defense.
3. hunting
4. because I ****ing want one

What spine do you think I don't have?


Uh huh....

'Go ahead punk 'make my day' ....right :lol:



again, the only time I was a mortal danger to others with my gun was at the behest of my government. you are not anti-gun you are pro-fascism, pro-authoritarianism pro-guns in the hands of governments.
 
Again, with the politically invented gun killing number, adjust homicide you're at best 3 times lower, which tracks historically for the last century regardless of gun legislation.

But that doesn't sound as dramatic now does it?

Do you have any evidence to support such a claim ?
 
Do you have any evidence to support such a claim ?

The UN intentional homicide rate is publically available for your browsing at leisure
 
you are not anti-gun you are pro-fascism, pro-authoritarianism pro-guns in the hands of governments.

Well once you come out with that sort of drivel as some kind justification you are clearly too far gone here to be reasoned with
 
Well once you come out with that sort of drivel as some kind justification you are clearly too far gone here to be reasoned with



cue: "make excuses to convince myself that it's not that I don't have an answer is that the other guy doesn't deserve it, use that as a reason 'not' to answer simple questions posed"....


Right on time.


:lol:
 
The UN intentional homicide rate is publically available for your browsing at leisure

And it clearly shows your homicide is 4.7 times ours with nearly three quarters of those involving the use of a firearm. As I've said already if you were to remove the firearms killings from your overall homicide statistics your homicide rate would be pretty similar to that of most other developed countries
 
And it clearly shows your homicide is 4.7 times ours with nearly three quarters of those involving the use of a firearm. As I've said already if you were to remove the firearms killings from your overall homicide statistics your homicide rate would be pretty similar to that of most other developed countries




If you remove criminal on criminal gun homicides, we'd have the same rate, you claimed I couldn't do that, now you do this? :lol:

fact: if you don't have a criminal record, your are no more likely to be shot, than someone in the UK,.
 
cue: "make excuses to convince myself that it's not that I don't have an answer is that the other guy doesn't deserve it, use that as a reason 'not' to answer simple questions posed"....


Right on time.


:lol:

Once you invoke big government tyranny BS as an some kind of excuse then you have really gone off the deep end. What other response did you expect ? :roll:
 
Once you invoke big government tyranny BS as an some kind of excuse then you have really gone off the deep end. What other response did you expect ? :roll:


I expected you to answer my simple question. the fact you think you can do what you want without big government tyranny, suggests dishonesty or overt naivety on your part.

which is it?
 
If you remove criminal on criminal gun homicides, we'd have the same rate, you claimed I couldn't do that, now you do this? :lol:

fact: if you don't have a criminal record, your are no more likely to be shot, than someone in the UK,.

Oh I forgot . Only the US has criminals right ? :lol:
 
Oh I forgot . Only the US has criminals right ? :lol:



we are talking about the evil of guns, I'm pointing out in the US, guns, even illegal guns tend to be used between persons of the criminal element, upwards of 96% of the time.

are you having trouble keeping up?
 
we are talking about the evil of guns, I'm pointing out in the US, guns, even illegal guns tend to be used between persons of the criminal element, upwards of 96% of the time.

are you having trouble keeping up?

And why is it that isn't reflected within our criminal fraternity too then ? As I linked earlier (for our sins :() the UK actually has a worse per capita drugs problem than the US
 
And why is it that isn't reflected within our criminal fraternity too then ? As I linked earlier (for our sins :() the UK actually has a worse per capita drugs problem than the US


So you are suggesting guns turn people into kill crazy homicidal maniacs?

are you saying that's the lynch pin?

really?
 
so, it is due to "common sense" that you are unable to address my simple question. Noted.

No its due to common sense that I can see all you have left is to try and keep engaging the same circular arguments because you don't like my answers
 
No its due to common sense that I can see all you have left is to try and keep engaging the same circular arguments because you don't like my answers



How could I engage in "circular logic" when you won't even explain yourself?
 
So you are suggesting guns turn people into kill crazy homicidal maniacs?

are you saying that's the lynch pin?

really?

I'm saying that easy access to guns makes killing far too easy be that by accident or design. The unfortunate officer in the OP being just another tragic example of the collateral damage such a policy helps facilitate.

My position gets no more complicated than that
 
Last edited:
I'm saying that easy access to guns makes killing far too easy be that by accident or design. The unfortunate officer in the OP being just another tragic example of the collateral damage such a policy helps facilitate.

So, if all guns disapeared tomorrow, our homicide rate would be as yours?


My position gets no more complicated than that


It's rather simplistic and naive. It's akin to suggesting all we need are more soccer fields to become as fanatical about the sissy game as england.
 
Back
Top Bottom