• 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!

Ted Kennedy Dies of Brain Cancer at Age 77

Obviously. No one is forcing trigger locks on anyone.

I could have sworn that the argument came up when someone mentioned the efforts of Democrats to mandate trigger locks. Are you saying this is not the case?

However, when a gun is not in use, it makes sense to secure it, and that's what these tools are for.

Here's a scenario for you; you have a handgun for protection and keep it in your purse. You of course have a trigger lock on the weapon because in your scenario, you are afraid of someone stealing it and using it in a crime or accidental discharge; as you are attempting to fish your car keys from the purse, a thug emerges from the darkness; you grab your handgun for protection, but alas, it has a trigger lock on it and now you are helpless to prevent the thug from mugging you, and perhaps worse.

This scenario can apply equally well to the weapon kept in the home in a drawer in the bedroom.

They are not an instrument of Satan, TD.

Say what? :rofl
 
No more so than the extensive taxes we already pay, this just puts the choice back with us Parents. :2wave:

How so it sounds like government getting involved in a private matter. Try to be consistent with your outrage. The government providing money for vouchers is government involvement.


How am I supposed to defend my family and property if I have to ask the badido to hold on a sec while I unlock my pistole. :doh

It's an infringment.

So you're saying that you're going to be held at gunpoint the moment you exit the gun shop after you buy your gun? Come on don't be ridiculous. Do you keep a gunlock on your gun when its not in use and stored in your home? Again I ask how do gun locks infringe on you owning a gun? How exactly do gun locks stop you from buying guns? You can't be arsed to remove the gun lock when you actually need to use it?

Do you store you guns in the open at home or do you lock them up?
 
How so it sounds like government getting involved in a private matter. Try to be consistent with your outrage. The government providing money for vouchers is government involvement.
how in the world do you figure that the govt giving you 'your money' to decide which school your child will attend, more govt involvement? :doh
 
I don't think you comprehend what these "vouchers" are. You already pay property taxes to support your local school. If you want to pull your child out and place them in a school that teaches instead of indoctrinates, you can, but you still pay the property taxes for public schools.

Vouchers are a return of YOUR money BACK to YOU so that you can pay for the education of your child with money you gave the government for schools your kids no longer attend.

Short explanation; it is YOUR money. The Government is just giving it back. What a concept eh?

I understand perfectly what vouchers are. People use them to send their kids to private schools. Social security is my money as well but aren't you against that? Medicare, Medicaid all money I pay out. Disability, unemployment insurance. Again be consistent. The same can be said about school vouchers as these programs which taxpayers pay into and at times use themselves.



No one suggests that gun locks prevent you from owning a gun. They prevent you from defending yourself with the gun due to an asinine Liberal idea that we need to make guns useless for the purpose for which they are intended in order to support an asinine agenda that assumes if we disarm law abiding citizens, we can make them safe from crime.

I know, this makes ZERO sense; but that is the mentality of the disarm America crowd which crows about Constitutional rights but when it comes to your second amendment rights, all bets are off.

:2wave:

Um Rev kinda tried to make the case that somehow gunlocks violate the second amendment and prevent you from bearing arms. Totally incorrent. How does a gunlock prevent you from using a gun when you need it? This is ridiculous just take the damn thing off when you don't need it. Gun locks don't make guns useless anymore than having a safe that you store your gun in makes it useless. Gunlocks don't disarm the public again you're making an argument not based in logic
 
how in the world do you figure that the govt giving you 'your money' to decide which school your child will attend, more govt involvement? :doh

You're talking about government intervention here. I'd say if you guys were being consistent with doing away with social programs that vouchers would also go as well
 
I understand perfectly what vouchers are. People use them to send their kids to private schools. Social security is my money as well but aren't you against that? Medicare, Medicaid all money I pay out. Disability, unemployment insurance. Again be consistent. The same can be said about school vouchers as these programs which taxpayers pay into and at times use themselves.

Caution; poster is attempting to drag the debate into the circle of futility by jumping to other subjects when their original argument/assertion was false.

Um Rev kinda tried to make the case that somehow gunlocks violate the second amendment and prevent you from bearing arms. Totally incorrent. How does a gunlock prevent you from using a gun when you need it? This is ridiculous just take the damn thing off when you don't need it. Gun locks don't make guns useless anymore than having a safe that you store your gun in makes it useless. Gunlocks don't disarm the public again you're making an argument not based in logic

You ask: "How does a gunlock prevent you from using a gun when you need it?"

When do you think someone needs it? Perhaps when they are being attacked or threatened? How much time do you think you will have to remove the gunlock?

Once again, if the debate is about Government mandating gunlocks, I am all over it. If this is just a semantical effort to enter into a circle of futility, count me out.

If you think this Government doesn’t want to make handguns useless and ban them; think again.

:2wave:
 
You're talking about government intervention here. I'd say if you guys were being consistent with doing away with social programs that vouchers would also go as well

well since you can not grasp the simple concept that:

the govt giving people back 'their own money' is NOT govt intervention, this conversation is done. Enjoy the day
 
Caution; poster is attempting to drag the debate into the circle of futility by jumping to other subjects when their original argument/assertion was false.

It was not false. We're talking about relation here. Tax dollars being used for programs. Vouchers take the money that would normally go to the public school system and shift it to the private sector. Government intervention otherwise those that could afford it would pay themselves to send their kids to private school. It's all related.


You ask: "How does a gunlock prevent you from using a gun when you need it?"
When do you think someone needs it? Perhaps when they are being attacked or threatened? How much time do you think you will have to remove the gunlock?

This is absurd the original post talks about having gun owners being required to sell gunlocks when selling guns. Do you think you're going to be robbed the moment you leave the gun shop? It's still going to take time to load the gun. If you store it in your home you don't need to keep the gunlock on you could keep it in a safe or store it. All the law stated was selling gunlocks with guns. So again you're making a ridiculous argument.

Once again, if the debate is about Government mandating gunlocks, I am all over it. If this is just a semantical effort to enter into a circle of futility, count me out.

So this doesn't answer my question how does this stop you from bearing arms/owning a gun?

If you think this Government doesn’t want to make handguns useless and ban them; think again.

:2wave:

Nope already thought about it. You can rightfully own a handgun nothing making them useless unless you don't know how to use it.
 
well since you can not grasp the simple concept that:

the govt giving people back 'their own money' is NOT govt intervention, this conversation is done. Enjoy the day

Really now the money usually goes to public schools so the money would then go to pay for more expensive private schools. Just as if I pay into disability and i get disabled I'll be able to use that money. Again you're talking about a government run program.
 
I think the point of gun locks is this... A hefty percentage of weapons used by criminals out on the streets are actually stolen from the law-abiding gun owners during burglaries and car burglaries. A gun lock makes it more difficult for a gun to be stolen and used.

I never really thought this point was difficult to understand, but clearly, it is for some people.

A gun lock can also protect your children by making it impossible for them to use the gun when you aren't around.

A good friend of mine, a sergeant in a gang unit in Utah...his daughter killed herself with his service revolver, which he kept on the top of his dresser.

It's possible that a trigger lock MIGHT have prevented that.




Childeren are like criminals in that they are very very resourceful, a gun lock will not be the deterrent you think it would be.


Better suggestion?


Eductation. lots of it.... I am sorry for your friends loss, but what did he teach her about guns other than "no"?
 
Obviously. No one is forcing trigger locks on anyone. However, when a gun is not in use, it makes sense to secure it, and that's what these tools are for.

They are not an instrument of Satan, TD.




I secure all my guns save for the one or more I keep in speed safes....


I don't need a law forcing me to have a trigger lock on it as well. I can do for myself.
 
How so it sounds like government getting involved in a private matter. Try to be consistent with your outrage. The government providing money for vouchers is government involvement.


Oh my bad...


My positionis the federal government should be out of the education business. states as well. It's a local issue.


That said, if we are going to have government meddle in education, they neeed to allow choice.


Why are you against this choice?


So you're saying that you're going to be held at gunpoint the moment you exit the gun shop after you buy your gun? Come on don't be ridiculous.


strawman FAIL


Do you keep a gunlock on your gun when its not in use and stored in your home?

No. I keep them in a vault, and in a couple speed safes, those are new though as I never had a need to lock up my quick reach weapons before now....




Again I ask how do gun locks infringe on you owning a gun?

The proposal is to force me to have a trigger lock. Bandidos won't wait for me to "unlock" my pistol....

2nd time I said this. Please keep up. ;)


How exactly do gun locks stop you from buying guns?


Strawman, It affects the "keep and bear" part of the 2nd... sorry...


You can't be arsed to remove the gun lock when you actually need to use it?


"arsed"? I am not following your use of an unfammilliar vernacular.


Do you store you guns in the open at home or do you lock them up?



What I actually do, is not something I talk about in detail. Lets just say woe unto those who would trespass inside my domicile.... Woe unto them.... :gunsmilie:



See above, I use speed safes, but have had weapons not locked up for all my life, and look, no one got shot accidentally...


Why are you interested in what others do with guns inside thier homes, it's none of your business...
 
Wow 54 page's and not one person mention that the bastard was a terrorist Support not only that he gave them money. I'm speaking of those nice folks from Ireland the IRA.

The funny thing is that Gordan"what deal'Brown gave him the title of "Sir' which he should have never had been given since it is a direct violation of the US Const. but hey its friggen Kennedy we don't need to care about some silly thing about the US Const. now do we. hell if it wasn't for the Mob his Sex/Drug crazy older brother woul dhave never got elected as the President.
 
Back
Top Bottom