• 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

Tlrmln said:
Based on the murder rate numbers, we're about 15% Mexico. And lo-and-behold, our population is about 15% of Mexican descent.



Someone has never been to Mississipi, Lousiana, or East LA. 100% of the US is not as "1st world" as Germany. On the other hand, there are plenty of non-1st-world countries in Europe with lower murder rates than some of those that are 1st world. Are you suggesting that Russian and Poland are not civilized?

In other words, "1st world" is a stupid red-herring.
Click to expand...

Your personal impression of Mississippi, Louisiana and L.A. really has nothing to do with anything. Basing anything on your personal biases is folly considering the pseudo science you used to determine a connection between percentage of our Mexican heritage and gun violence in your first statement. If bigotry and racism is the argument your going to use try to desperately hold on to your man toys we're going to get them a whole lot quicker than I previously assumed. :lamo
 
Tlrmln said:
Based on the murder rate numbers, we're about 15% Mexico. And lo-and-behold, our population is about 15% of Mexican descent.
Click to expand...

And from that we are to draw what conclusion - that 100% of all murders in the United States of America are committed by "Mexicans"?

:rofl:bs:thumbdown:bs:rofl​

Tlrmln said:
Someone has never been to Mississipi, Lousiana, or East LA. 100% of the US is not as "1st world" as Germany. On the other hand, there are plenty of non-1st-world countries in Europe with lower murder rates than some of those that are 1st world. Are you suggesting that Russian and Poland are not civilized?
Click to expand...

You do realize that, for some people, the only "civilized" country in the world is the United States of America - don't you?

Tlrmln said:
In other words, "1st world" is a stupid red-herring.
Click to expand...

But it is one that is highly appealing to those who have no idea where the terms "First World country", and "Third World country" came from. Surprisingly enough you see the term "Second World country" very seldom.
 
Tlrmln said:
I'll compare them when you establish that "more wealthy" has anything to do with it.
Click to expand...

Compared to Yemen and Somalia we are doing really well.


Go USA!!!! Lol
 
marke said:
Two-thirds of Californians voted for a marriage law which protected the sanctity of traditional marriage, ...
Click to expand...

A "sanctity" that can be traced all the way back to the 13[sup]th[/sup] Century (and a ceremony that wasn't even considered all that necessary until the 16[sup]th[/sup] Century).

In a patrilineal society some arrangement like "marriage" is essential in order to determine the "legitimacy of succession" (it's somewhat difficult to know who the child's father is from simply observing the child's birth [especially if you don't actually know how women get pregnant]). In a matrilineal society it isn't difficult to tell who the child's mother was just by observing the birth of the child.

marke said:
... but sodomites were infuriated. The law was overturned by a single leftist activist sodomite judge. So much for what two-damn-thirds of Americans want.
Click to expand...

And so much for any indication of either humanity, or compassion, or even basic understanding of the human psyche on your part.
 
Last edited:
enderpotato00 said:
So every law-abiding citizen that owns guns will kill... Interesting... (sarcasm)
Click to expand...

It is an indisputable fact that not a single person has ever been "shot to death" by someone who did not have a gun.

The "logical conclusion" is patently obvious - well, isn't it?
 
Master Debator said:
Your personal impression of Mississippi, Louisiana and L.A. really has nothing to do with anything. Basing anything on your personal biases is folly considering the pseudo science you used to determine a connection between percentage of our Mexican heritage and gun violence in your first statement. If bigotry and racism is the argument your going to use try to desperately hold on to your man toys we're going to get them a whole lot quicker than I previously assumed. :lamo
Click to expand...

I see, so when I do it regarding MS and LA (which are objectively two of the poorest states and most violent states in the US), it's "personal impression," "pseudoscience," and "bigotry," but when you do it regarding Russia or Mexico, it's pure objective fact. Isn't that precious?
 
Tlrmln said:
I see, so when I do it regarding MS and LA (which are objectively two of the poorest states and most violent states in the US), it's "personal impression," "pseudoscience," and "bigotry," but when you do it regarding Russia or Mexico, it's pure objective fact. Isn't that precious?
Click to expand...

When you say Missouri and Louisiana are two of the poorest States what do you mean by that? Poor citizens? That I'd agree with. They do. They have many of those. But they are located in The United States of America which isn't poor in either wealth or resources and is not operated under a corrupt(at least obviously corrupt)or dysfunctional government such as those in Mexico and Russia. The poverty that exists in Missouri and Louisiana exists because we choose and the governments of those states choose to spend those resources elsewhere, rather than helping the poor. You think they don't have poor people in the U.K., in Canada, in Singapore? Of course they do, they just choose to help their citizens rather than bankrupt them with medical costs and price them out of higher education. This is why we compare situations between 1st world countries and other 1st world countries so we can analyze various approaches. Apparently you want us to scale more towards Mexico and Russia. You should put that on a campaign sticker. :lamo
 
Master Debator said:
When you say Missouri and Louisiana are two of the poorest States what do you mean by that? Poor citizens? That I'd agree with. They do. They have many of those. But they are located in The United States of America which isn't poor in either wealth or resources and is not operated under a corrupt(at least obviously corrupt)or dysfunctional government such as those in Mexico and Russia. The poverty that exists in Missouri and Louisiana exists because we choose and the governments of those states choose to spend those resources elsewhere, rather than helping the poor. You think they don't have poor people in the U.K., in Canada, in Singapore? Of course they do, they just choose to help their citizens rather than bankrupt them with medical costs and price them out of higher education. This is why we compare situations between 1st world countries and other 1st world countries so we can analyze various approaches. Apparently you want us to scale more towards Mexico and Russia. You should put that on a campaign sticker. :lamo
Click to expand...

You do realize that the term "First World Country" has nothing whatsoever to do with the country's economic health, don't you?
 
apdst said:
The **** will hit the fan, when it happens. Hope you're ready.
Click to expand...

ooh you are soo scary.
Except that you aren't at all.
Doomsday bull**** is doomsday bull**** is doomsday bull****.
Good luck over throwing the government with your guns.
 
BlueTex said:
served in the military...
Click to expand...

It's funny. I understood what you meant.
Kinda makes it seem like some people have a narrative that they are trying to push, and not really reading for comprehension.
 
Tlrmln said:
It's the way practically every gun control debate goes around here.

Somebody says something like "we need to ban assault weapons!!!"

We respond with something like, "how will that save lives....what's so special about assault weapons, specifically?"

They answer: "You care more about your guns than about children's lives. You're an evil Trumptard!!1"

And so on.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. I have, however, read that subforum. The two extreme sides of it are equally self righteous and dismissive of diverging ideas.
 
marke said:
Two-thirds of Californians voted for a marriage law which protected the sanctity of traditional marriage, but sodomites were infuriated. The law was overturned by a single leftist activist sodomite judge. So much for what two-damn-thirds of Americans want.
Click to expand...

This thread isn't about sodomy. Please keep your fantasies to yourself.

The OP was about guns and what most Americans want as far as assault weapons bans.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
A "sanctity" that can be traced all the way back to the 13[sup]th[/sup] Century (and a ceremony that wasn't even considered all that necessary until the 16[sup]th[/sup] Century).

In a patrilineal society some arrangement like "marriage" is essential in order to determine the "legitimacy of succession" (it's somewhat difficult to know who the child's father is from simply observing the child's birth [especially if you don't actually know how women get pregnant]). In a matrilineal society it isn't difficult to tell who the child's mother was just by observing the birth of the child.



And so much for any indication of either humanity, or compassion, or even basic understanding of the human psyche on your part.
Click to expand...

You answered the question. There may be many valid reasons 2/3 of Americans may not get what they want.
 
Pound4abrown said:
ooh you are soo scary.
Except that you aren't at all.
Doomsday bull**** is doomsday bull**** is doomsday bull****.
Good luck over throwing the government with your guns.
Click to expand...

The last time the government tried to confiscate guns, the government lost.
 
American said:
Bull**** worded questions and hyperbole from the Left will get you any poll result you want. You people are still struggling so hard to get to Nazi/Commie style gun confiscation programs. Actual reduction of crimes in Democrat-run cities is going up. Your dream of totalitarian socialism hasn't panned out yet the way you want.
Click to expand...

You mean like when Obama took your guns? Remember you people whining about that for 8 years?

What does socialism have to do with guns? You people are posting about sodomy, abortion and socialism in a thread about a poll of Americans and guns.
 
tres borrachos said:
This thread isn't about sodomy. Please keep your fantasies to yourself.

The OP was about guns and what most Americans want as far as assault weapons bans.
Click to expand...

Lefties don't give a damn about laws supported by 2/3 of Americans if those laws conflict with leftist lust and desire.
 
swing_voter said:
Pro-gun people need enact some common sense gun legislation. That way the people can see they're trying to solve the problem at least.

The number of anti-gun people is going to rise and rise and eventually, all guns will be banned.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a faithul and true democrat party member, comrade.
 
madman said:
They dont need to see a debate to understand that people with guns kill.
Click to expand...

People with guns kill about 10,000 Americans each year. People with cars kill about 60,000 Americans each year. What to do?
 
tres borrachos said:
You mean like when Obama took your guns? Remember you people whining about that for 8 years?

What does socialism have to do with guns? You people are posting about sodomy, abortion and socialism in a thread about a poll of Americans and guns.
Click to expand...

So it's not just me who noticed that the thread has nothing to do with the OP?
 
marke said:
People with guns kill about 10,000 Americans each year. People with cars kill about 60,000 Americans each year. What to do?
Click to expand...

Oh, I love this asinine analogy. How many vehicular deaths are intentional?
 
RedSunRising said:
So it's not just me who noticed that the thread has nothing to do with the OP?
Click to expand...

Oh hell no. The right is tarding up the thread, as usual, with posts about sodomy and socialism and abortion any whatever else pops in their heads. It always happens here.

I'm actually surprised I didn't see a "But her emails and Uranium One" post in the midst of all of this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom