• 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!

Gunman shot by police after massacre in Germany

So if this guy didn't have a gun to massacre these victims you think he would have done the same with the bat or knife?

I think its wrong to deny basic human freedoms to some because others abuse them, in the weird hope that those denied freedoms in the weird hope that crimes dependent upon the abuse of those freedoms which didn't exist before those freedoms were restricted will somehow cease.

Since the crimes didn't exist before the freedom was infringed on, it's logical to recognize that the crime is the result of the infringement, not the freedom itself.
 
I am actually for free gun ownership. I find the topic similar to legalizing drugs, which I am also for.

My only hesitation to free gun ownership is the increased usage of guns in conflicts that currently don't have guns present. It's funny that you use the term big and small penis because that is the exact scenario's that worry me. Some drunk guy with an ego trip pulls a gun on some other guy for talking to his girlfriend in the club.

Yeah. Used to happen.

Shooting while drunk should be a felony.

Laws are soooo good at deterring things, aren't they?


I used to be in security for clubs/bars. Stupid drunken fights happen daily and I would hate to see guns being brought into the mix.

40,000 people a year die on the nation's roads, many of them caused by drunks. Just think of the lives to be saved if we can get the drunks to shoot each other before they go home.

How exactly would 9/11 be prevent with the usage of guns?

You mean besides removing the assurances the terrorist had that they'd be the only people on the airplane with weapons?

Or do you mean the chance that an armed passenger might have the audacity to shoot some nice muslim trying to hijack an airplane?

Are we going to allow people to bring guns onto planes?

NO!!!! ABSOLUTELY NOT! When a terrorist situation hits, we're going to require that the airplane land, the passengers be returned home to get their guns, and then reboard the airplane.

One shot of the gun and the entire plane losses cabin pressure and goes down.

Needless to say, this kind of Hollywood induced ignorance is why America ranks at the bottom of most measures of industrialized nation intelligence.

No. A tiny friggin' bullet hole can't depressurize a major jet aircraft being filled by the air taken from the turbofan compressors pushing the simonized aluminum rock through the sky.

This is why flight marshals use rubber bullets isn't it?

Rubber bullets don't penetrate bad guys, what's the point in having them, if they do, which I doubt.

Nope, guns aren't a hazard to the bird.

Guns restrictions are.
 
Crimes are deterred by the availability of the tool used to commit the crime. The harder it is to get the tool the more likely it will be the crime will not be committed.
Absolutely false, crimes are all about opportunity and motive, the weapon used, whether it is a gun, samurai sword, butcher knife, axe(ala Lizzy Borden), pencil, or even a shoe lace/piano wire is irrelevant, it is the end result that is desired. If a criminal has the opportunity to commit a crime, they will use any object available to carry out the action, for instance, box cutters and jet airliners killed over 3 thousand in America on a very famous date.
 
So if this guy didn't have a gun to massacre these victims you think he would have done the same with the bat or knife?
What makes you think he wouldn't?
 
Gun laws are a deterrent. They can't stop gun crime but they can lessen it by making guns not openly available to people who aren't criminal minded enough to seek out weapons on the black market.
Why do you need to keep guns away from those who are not criminally minded?
 
Jeffery Dahmer didn't use a gun(that I know of).
 
You don't. If they aren't criminals they can freely purchase a gun.
No, they can't -- at least not under what you'd have for gun control.
 
Good response imo ..
Yes... because making harder for law abiding people to get guns will stop criminals from committing crime with them.

:roll:

Tell me:
How would any of the laws noted in the article I posted have stopped the shooting in question?
 
Right on cue, Europeons react with more gun control:

After attacks, Europe hurries to tighten gun laws

From the link:

European Union lawmakers proposed tighter gun control across the bloc last year, including guidelines saying that only people over 18 not deemed a threat to public safety could buy and keep guns. EU members have until 2010 to adopt the measures.

That's the mentality of the gun control crowd. Should be easy to find out who all those people would be :lamo.
 
Yes... because making harder for law abiding people to get guns will stop criminals from committing crime with them.

Why would law abiding people want guns?
There will always be criminals, having guns will not make a difference.
Besides, i would not want my neighbours having guns.

If required illegally the laws would hardly matter to the shooter now would it?
 
From the link:

European Union lawmakers proposed tighter gun control across the bloc last year, including guidelines saying that only people over 18 not deemed a threat to public safety could buy and keep guns. EU members have until 2010 to adopt the measures.

That's the mentality of the gun control crowd. Should be easy to find out who all those people would be :lamo.
Amazing, isn't it?
 
that only people over 18 not deemed a threat to public safety could buy and keep guns. EU members have until 2010 to adopt the measures.[/color]

That's the mentality of the gun control crowd. Should be easy to find out who all those people would be :lamo.

Sounds fine to me.

Be over 18, have no criminal/mental medical history, declare what you want the gun for, Get a license and a secure safe.
 
Why would law abiding people want guns?
The absolute absurdity of that question says all that needs to be said.
Thanks for playing.
 
The absolute absurdity of that question says all that needs to be said.
Thanks for playing.

Might as well admit that you have no faith in the police if you need dangerous weapons to keep you safe :roll:
 
Why would law abiding people want guns?
I am a law abiding citizen and I own a gun because:
1) Target shooting is extremely fun
2) I hope I never need it to defend myself, but would rather have it if the need ever arises.
There will always be criminals, having guns will not make a difference.
Not true, most criminals are cowards by nature, simply having an armed would be victim is a deterrent, no matter what the "victim" arms themselves with, a gun does nothing more than adding range to defense.
Besides, i would not want my neighbours having guns.
Not to be offensive, but as it isn't my business what my neighbors do in their homes, what business is it of yours what your neighbors own in theirs? The only difference is when your neighbors effect your space. I, as a gun owner would willingly defend my neighbors if they were being attacked in my vicinity, I would hope if your neighbors were armed and you were in danger they would extend you that same courtesy.

If required illegally the laws would hardly matter to the shooter now would it?
That's the point, the laws don't work in their stated intent, they merely make it difficult or impossible for the law abiding to exercise ownership of the same means the criminals have.
 
Might as well admit that you have no faith in the police if you need dangerous weapons to keep you safe :roll:

Keeping America safe, one donut at a time.

cop-doughnuts.jpg
 
Why would law abiding people want guns?
There will always be criminals, having guns will not make a difference.
Besides, i would not want my neighbours having guns.

If required illegally the laws would hardly matter to the shooter now would it?




By your logic we need to ban Muslims, Muslims kill people......
 
Might as well admit that you have no faith in the police if you need dangerous weapons to keep you safe :roll:
Keep us safe... like they did the victims in this shooting?
 
Last edited:
Might as well admit that you have no faith in the police if you need dangerous weapons to keep you safe :roll:
Emergency responders in my city(possibly a state law) have a mandatory minimum response time of 8 minutes, it only takes 2 seconds for a successful attack on a victim when an attacker shows no restraint, the math is not on the side of the police, no matter how professional they are or how well they do their jobs, it's not a faith argument, it's a reality.
 
Might as well admit that you have no faith in the police if you need dangerous weapons to keep you safe :roll:




Police are historians, tasked with documenting the slaughter of you and your loved ones.


The police have no duty to protect you. I do not put my life in the hands of others, criminals or police.
 
I am a law abiding citizen and I own a gun because:
1) Target shooting is extremely fun
2) I hope I never need it to defend myself, but would rather have it if the need ever arises.

Go to a shooting range? Inside Scotland and areas outside of London. You can go hunting and shooting.
Phone the police?

Not true, most criminals are cowards by nature, simply having an armed would be victim is a deterrent, no matter what the "victim" arms themselves with, a gun does nothing more than adding range to defense.

I doubt it, if guns were legalised. I bet there would be a increase of crime rather than a decrease.

That's the point, the laws don't work in their stated intent, they merely make it difficult or impossible for the law abiding to exercise ownership of the same means the criminals have.

No one wants gun.
It ridiculous to own a gun in London, going to go pigeon hunting?

You can own a gun inside UK, it is just hard. No one bothers.
 
Back
Top Bottom