• 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

Mach said:
Put your mouse over his far left Award icon, it will tell you all you need to know about that.
Click to expand...

pretty lame-I guess you don't have an argument
 
TurtleDude said:
do you actually bother to read the crap the anti gun side posts here? we have several demanding a ban of all guns. We have a ton of democrat politicians wanting to ban semi autos. Do you have a clue how many firearms that means.

We have more than enough gun regulations. many of them are clearly unconstitutional with the incorporation through McDonald. They also violate substantive due process and the privileges and immunities clause of the federal and most state constitutions.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, TurtleDude, that I am new here. I don't know who the anti-gun people are yet, but I imagine it's pretty easy to figure out. I didn't mean for you to interpret my contact as an attack. I merely wanted to let you know that you translate, in my undeveloped opinion, as a pro-Second Amendment guy who insults people who disagree with you. That doesn't help the cause.
 
TurtleDude said:
I pretty much know the attitudes of those I deal with. There are new posters who are ignorant of gun issues. Then we have those who do nothing but bait and troll gun advocates.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I laugh at gun advocates just as much as I laugh at gun banners. If anything ever needed advocacy, it wasn't a man made bullet shooter. Check out your local humane society.
 
TurtleDude said:
Don't need to-=just a few justices. Mob rule is what you want
Click to expand...

That's nothing but empty rhetoric. There is nothing inherently different between a majority of citizens voting to take away your guns and a majority of Justices voting to protect them.

TurtleDude said:
that is a stupid nonsensical response to what I said. You apparently are gleeful over the thoughts of jackbooted thugs smashing down doors and killing people who won't turn over their weapons. Your attitude is exactly why the founders created the second amendment
Click to expand...

I'm happy at the thought of violent law breakers being incarcerated. I'll be happier still when that means gun nuts with arsenals and loud mouths rather than desperate migrants and pot smokers.

KevinKohler said:
Which we don't have.
Click to expand...
Take a civics class for chrissakes. A constitutional Republic simply means we're governed by elected representatives operating under a constitutional framework. We elect those officials through popular vote in every case other than the Presidency. That also makes us a representative democracy. The two are not mutually exclusive.
 
RedSunRising said:
Wow, that's a little more than paranoid. Why can't we have an argument about gun regulations without the two extreme sides, including you, going banana sauce?
Click to expand...

There's nothing extreme about it: it's a perfectly natural assumption to make when someone fervently calls for a "solution," but refuses to explain how that solution will solve what he claims it will solve, and even so, goes on to accuse you of not caring about dead children because you don't agree with his solution.

How do you "have an argument" with someone like that?
 
RedSunRising said:
I have to admit, TurtleDude, that I am new here. I don't know who the anti-gun people are yet, but I imagine it's pretty easy to figure out. I didn't mean for you to interpret my contact as an attack. I merely wanted to let you know that you translate, in my undeveloped opinion, as a pro-Second Amendment guy who insults people who disagree with you. That doesn't help the cause.
Click to expand...

when people constantly say things need to be banned, without ever explaining why-they are trolling. When someone constantly pretends that demanding people register firearms will stop crime while ignoring the fact that criminals cannot even be prosecuted for failing to register guns-they really don't care about crime control. One poster-for example-claims that AR 15s were Designed for HEAVY COMBAT and that is why they should be banned, but denies that the MI Carbine (issued to over 5 million US soldiers and marines) is a "weapon of war" --that level of dishonesty isn't conducive to rational debate

The fact is-when people cannot explain why the laws they want will actually reduce crime and dismiss assertions that the laws will harass lawful gun owners, I think it is pretty obvious that politics, not public safety motivates their position.
 
RedSunRising said:
To be honest, I laugh at gun advocates just as much as I laugh at gun banners. If anything ever needed advocacy, it wasn't a man made bullet shooter. Check out your local humane society.
Click to expand...

and I am supposed to take this as a serious argument.
 
Tlrmln said:
There's nothing extreme about it: it's a perfectly natural assumption to make when someone fervently calls for a "solution," but refuses to explain how that solution will solve what he claims it will solve, and even so, goes on to accuse you of not caring about dead children because you don't agree with his solution.

How do you "have an argument" with someone like that?
Click to expand...

exactly-and when you have been involved in this issue as long as I have, it is pretty easy to see when someone is not motivated by a real desire to save lives-but rather wants to harass people.
 
Tlrmln said:
There's nothing extreme about it: it's a perfectly natural assumption to make when someone fervently calls for a "solution," but refuses to explain how that solution will solve what he claims it will solve, and even so, goes on to accuse you of not caring about dead children because you don't agree with his solution.

How do you "have an argument" with someone like that?
Click to expand...

Kind of hard to have a rational conversation with someone who refuses to acknowledge the sheer amount of guns and or gun laws themselves result in us having astronomically more gun homicides than the rest of the developed world. I suppose that's just a coincidence?
 
Master Debator said:
Kind of hard to have a rational conversation with someone who refuses to acknowledge the sheer amount of guns and or gun laws themselves result in us having astronomically more gun homicides than the rest of the developed world. I suppose that's just a coincidence?
Click to expand...

why do you gun banners always try to ignore places like Mexico, South Africa and Russia. we don't have astronomically more gun homicides than the rest of the developed world and most of our gun homicides are caused by those in the illicit narcotics trade killing others involved in that trade

What is really funny is watching people like you-be so ignorant of the failures of drug prohibition and the violence it has caused-wanting to do the same thing with guns
 
Tlrmln said:
There's nothing extreme about it: it's a perfectly natural assumption to make when someone fervently calls for a "solution," but refuses to explain how that solution will solve what he claims it will solve, and even so, goes on to accuse you of not caring about dead children because you don't agree with his solution.

How do you "have an argument" with someone like that?
Click to expand...

It's not caring about dead children if you dont have a better solution
 
Master Debator said:
Kind of hard to have a rational conversation with someone who refuses to acknowledge the sheer amount of guns and or gun laws themselves result in us having astronomically more gun homicides than the rest of the developed world. I suppose that's just a coincidence?
Click to expand...

It's a giant coincidence!!!!!! Lol
 
Master Debator said:
That's nothing but empty rhetoric. There is nothing inherently different between a majority of citizens voting to take away your guns and a majority of Justices voting to protect them.



I'm happy at the thought of violent law breakers being incarcerated. I'll be happier still when that means gun nuts with arsenals and loud mouths rather than desperate migrants and pot smokers.


Take a civics class for chrissakes. A constitutional Republic simply means we're governed by elected representatives operating under a constitutional framework. We elect those officials through popular vote in every case other than the Presidency. That also makes us a representative democracy. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

And those elected officials can't just Willy nilly change laws based on the desire of their constituents.
 
TurtleDude said:
why do you gun banners always try to ignore places like Mexico, South Africa and Russia. we don't have astronomically more gun homicides than the rest of the developed world and most of our gun homicides are caused by those in the illicit narcotics trade killing others involved in that trade

What is really funny is watching people like you-be so ignorant of the failures of drug prohibition and the violence it has caused-wanting to do the same thing with guns
Click to expand...

Who is people like me? I support legalization of all drugs and acknowledge its role in violent crime. Guess what? Those first world countries also have prohibitions on various narcotics. The difference is their criminals don't have easy access to firearms. I also recognize there are third world ****holes all over that would be ridiculous to compare to us which is why I said our gun violence was astronomical compared to the rest of the developed world. You know, places with equitable resources and stable goverments.
 
Master Debator said:
Kind of hard to have a rational conversation with someone who refuses to acknowledge the sheer amount of guns and or gun laws themselves result in us having astronomically more gun homicides than the rest of the developed world. I suppose that's just a coincidence?
Click to expand...

So in other words, a "rational conversation" is one that involves one side accepting all your arguments and premises as true. That's refreshing.

The murder rate in the US is not "astronomically more" than other comparable countries or regions. The murder rate in Europe is about 3/100,000 people. In the US it's about 5. To put that in context, the murder rate in Mexico, where they have nothing but strict gun laws, is close to 25.
 
Tlrmln said:
So in other words, a "rational conversation" is one that involves one side accepting all your arguments and premises as true. That's refreshing.

The murder rate in the US is not "astronomically more" than other comparable countries or regions. The murder rate in Europe is about 3/100,000 people. In the US it's about 5. To put that in context, the murder rate in Mexico, where they have nothing but strict gun laws, is close to 25.
Click to expand...

It is astronomically higher in the US
 
KevinKohler said:
And those elected officials can't just Willy nilly change laws based on the desire of their constituents.
Click to expand...

Who said they could? You said we weren't a democracy. You were wrong. We're not a direct democracy but we are a representative one. When we have the majority of representatives we will be changing those laws. You can bet on that.
 
Master Debator said:
Who said they could? You said we weren't a democracy. You were wrong. We're not a direct democracy but we are a representative one. When we have the majority of representatives we will be changing those laws. You can bet on that.
Click to expand...

Probably, hence why guns will be flying off the shelves next year.
 
Tlrmln said:
So in other words, a "rational conversation" is one that involves one side accepting all your arguments and premises as true. That's refreshing.

The murder rate in the US is not "astronomically more" than other comparable countries or regions. The murder rate in Europe is about 3/100,000 people. In the US it's about 5. To put that in context, the murder rate in Mexico, where they have nothing but strict gun laws, is close to 25.
Click to expand...

So your argument is at least we're not Mexico?
:lamo

Trying to compare us to the entirety of Europe, which includes non 1st world countries is disingenuous at best and even then with the size of populations you're talking about thousands of more dead Americans than Europe. And you plan to counter gun protestors with at least we're not Mexico or Russia? :lamo:lamo:lamo













Goodluck with that. :mrgreen:
 
Casper said:
Probably, hence why guns will be flying off the shelves next year.
Click to expand...

So? We'll get them all eventually. Demographically conservatives are headed for a black hole. An apt description because all that whiteness is going to be swallowed by blackness. :lamo
 
Last edited:
Master Debator said:
Who said they could? You said we weren't a democracy. You were wrong. We're not a direct democracy but we are a representative one. When we have the majority of representatives we will be changing those laws. You can bet on that.
Click to expand...

That is very different from your first comment I quoted, and far more accurate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom