• 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!

[W:711] 2/3rds of Americans want an assault weapons ban

Master Debator said:
That was over two decades ago. Times change. Back then we couldn't legalize gay marriage or marijuana. But go ahead and lie and tell me you feel confident about that prediction. :lamo
Click to expand...
Yet Obama couldn't do it when he had the majority in both houses. So the fact it was over two decades ago is irrelevant. When they enacted that ban they made the claim there was huge public support for that ban just like they are trying to claim today. But yet those who voted for the ban got their asses handed to them.
 
vegas giants said:
Text - H.R.4296 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Click to expand...

Ah, but you've made a mistake, lol.

That does not provide a definition of assault weapon. It does try valiantly, and confusingly, to DESCRIBE some...but actually define? Nope. Just a description of some of the things you can own, and some of the things you can't. Which is why the law is so week, states have their own.

Isn't this fun?
 
jamesrage said:
Can you post the text that proves your claim. Because I don't remember it saying anything about assault rifles.
Click to expand...

Wait ...did you post any text?

Suddenly I am held to a much greater standard. Lol
 
KevinKohler said:
Ah, but you've made a mistake, lol.

That does not provide a definition of assault weapon. It does try valiantly, and confusingly, to DESCRIBE some...but actually define? Nope. Just a description of some of the things you can own, and some of the things you can't. Which is why the law is so week, states have their own.

Isn't this fun?
Click to expand...

Prove it


Super fun!
 
How about we do it right here, right now?

Any of you, define what it is you want banned, federally. Be specific, the devil is in the details. No "assault rifles are rifles that make killing people easy!", because that would then include the M1, which has killed more people than any other gun, most likely.
 
BlueTex said:
The last federal assault weapons ban started with George HW Bush banning their importation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

How is that the first when the Brady Assault Weapons ban was the last federal assault weapons ban? Although I am not sure how that is ban when American companies were still able to make copies of those firearms.
 
vegas giants said:
Prove it


Super fun!
Click to expand...

Prove what? That your link doesn't contain what you say it does? Its your link...the burden of proof is on you to prove it does say what you say it does.

Otherwise...troll is, as troll does, lol.
 
vegas giants said:
Wait ...did you post any text?

Suddenly I am held to a much greater standard. Lol
Click to expand...

I didn't post any text because there is no text in that supports your claim. Which is why you haven't posted any text.
 
KevinKohler said:
How about we do it right here, right now?

Any of you, define what it is you want banned, federally. Be specific, the devil is in the details. No "assault rifles are rifles that make killing people easy!", because that would then include the M1, which has killed more people than any other gun, most likely.
Click to expand...

I dont want anything banned. I own a assault weapon now.
 
KevinKohler said:
Prove what? That your link doesn't contain what you say it does? Its your link...the burden of proof is on you to prove it does say what you say it does.

Otherwise...troll is, as troll does, lol.
Click to expand...

Have a super day!
 
jamesrage said:
I didn't post any text because there is no text in that supports your claim. Which is why you haven't posted any text.
Click to expand...

And you also have no definition of an assault rifle....outside of your head
 
vegas giants said:
Howitzer
Click to expand...

Ah.

See, I was unclear, because you have yet to define an assault weapon, or post anyone else's definition.

Oddly enough, that's the secret to achieving your goal. Define exactly what you want, so you can have a coherent discussion on it. Saddly, no politicians want to step up to the plate, which will result in nothing being accomplished.
 
KevinKohler said:
Ah.

See, I was unclear, because you have yet to define an assault weapon, or post anyone else's definition.

Oddly enough, that's the secret to achieving your goal. Define exactly what you want, so you can have a coherent discussion on it. Saddly, no politicians want to step up to the plate, which will result in nothing being accomplished.
Click to expand...

My goal is to improve well enough to place well in 2 gun USPSA competitions with my ar 15 and 9 mm
 
vegas giants said:
Is is if he says he has a definition of an assault rifle.


I want to see it
Click to expand...

Mine is simple. If local PD can own it, I can own it. If its too big and bad for them, its too big and bad for me.
 
jamesrage said:
Yet Obama couldn't do it when he had the majority in both houses. So the fact it was over two decades ago is irrelevant. When they enacted that ban they made the claim there was huge public support for that ban just like they are trying to claim today. But yet those who voted for the ban got their asses handed to them.
Click to expand...

Obama and those Democrats were pretty moderate at the time, hell, a lot of their policies would seem downright conservative today. Obama never fought for gay marriage. He didn't even publicly support it until 2012 and he never supported legalization of marijuana during his presidency. I don't even know if he supports it now and I don't care. Obama was a dinosaur before he even left office. The party left him and Hillary back in the stoneage with your lot. Activists got that done like they will get this done. Really guys. You've been losing steadily(if not by law certainly by public perception)on nearly every social front other than those you just lost outright. You guys are done. You just don't know it yet. Like the dinosaurs before us. :lamo
 
KevinKohler said:
Mine is simple. If local PD can own it, I can own it. If its too big and bad for them, its too big and bad for me.
Click to expand...

Again....not a legal definition of the term
 
Irredentist said:
Preventing an active shooter in the first place is much preferable to dealing with one already underway. Realistically, increased background checks and red flag laws don't require you to sacrifice anything.
Click to expand...

what active shooters would have been stopped by a private sales background check? Now I want the data base to be kept up to date and that say military equivalents of felonies be quickly reported to the data base. Red Flag Laws are a gray area with me-but there must be due process-procedurally and substantively, with the right to sue if someone maliciously reports a gun owner.
 
Media_Truth said:
Should there be open-carry of Assault-style weapons? Let's test your idealistic proposition.

1. Shooter starts firing rounds with assault weapon.
2. People start fleeing the scene. Bedlam breaks out. Anybody close to the shooter will likely be killed.
3. Mr. Turtledude is 50 yards away with his handgun, and pulls it out.
4. Shooter has better range, and more rounds.
5. Thoughts and prayers for Mr. Turtledude.

I have a better idea. Get the heck out of there, and let law enforcement handle it.
Click to expand...

you cannot define "assault style" (this seems to be the new term after your side has been schooled about the term "assault") weapons. I have never been a fan of open carry in urban areas for many reasons.

50 yards is an easy shot for me.
 
VanceMack said:
But the stupidity in your words testify as to why we don’t fall for the same mindless **** you do. All you care about is passing a law...passing a ban! DO SOMETHING!!!! You don’t give a **** that nothing you suggest will make a bit of difference or that the bans you suggest will impact all US citizens. You don’t give a **** about the dead bodies from the day to day gun violence. You are committed to a CAUSE and all you have to offer is empty rhetoric and weak ass emotional pleas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

their entire goal is passing laws designed to harass conservative gun owners because we tend not to vote for leftwing agendas
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom