• 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!

White House to Push Gun Control

I'm a shooter, hunter and reloader who sees America's handgun fetish as a cruel fascination with a phallic symbol that unjustifiably kills thousands of its children annually.

yeah sure. so tell me what advantage does bullseye have over 231. and why would you use 231 instead of bullseye

and (yeah I suppose you can google this) what was the standard IPSC loading for a #68 H&G cast bullet to make "major" with 231
 
yeah sure. so tell me what advantage does bullseye have over 231. and why would you use 231 instead of bullseye

and (yeah I suppose you can google this) what was the standard IPSC loading for a #68 H&G cast bullet to make "major" with 231

I guess google "reloading 45 ACP" is getting a work out

I can smell nonsense on this subject a mile away
 
Who says I want anything? I think the present guns are fine. Until someone suggests something I think is better, I'm OK where we are, and have said so all along. However, if I had claim a desire, it would be that those who own and use guns be well schooled and use the tool properly and prudently. Don't know what law to pass for that though.


then the crux of your argument should be the sorry state of Mental health these days, NOT gun ownership. It is dishonest to round about claim that if we just got rid of guns then suicides would cease.


j-mac
 
I don't think I said that. But I did see someone once make the same causal relationship error when he noted crime went down after the Brady bill. Crime is more complicated than gun laws alone. And I'm not sure the data tells us anything at all. The fact is a regulation has be judged on it's merit, the logic behind it. This is the same with all regulations. There is nothing different as it relates to gun regulations. And when we measure effectieness, we have to define the purpose accurately, and actually show a causal relationship.

Okay let just take a step back for a moment, lets say we just put a stop to any gun regulation what-so-ever, any john doe could walk in off the street and purchase a gun, and over the next 5 years violent crime was to increase .

Now would “you” still be making that very same argument, that there would be no need to look at the gun laws until after “we measure effectieness, we have to define the purpose accurately, and actually show a causal relationship. “

-shrugs shoulders- you know, somehow, I'm betting your argument would be much different.
 
Last edited:
Okay let just take a step back for a moment, lets say we just put a stop to any gun regulation what-so-ever, any john doe could walk in off the street and purchase a gun, and over the next 5 years violent crime was to increase .

Now would “you” still be making that very same argument, that there would be no need to look at the gun laws until after “we measure effectieness, we have to define the purpose accurately, and actually show a causal relationship. “

-shrugs shoulders- you know, somehow, I'm betting your argument would be much different.

You would still have to show it was the only, or the more significant factor. Just because something comes first doesn't mean it is the cause. This is true no matter who tries to skirt it, liberal or conservative. And if you are paying attention, I even used how some tried to make the fallious argument concerning the Brady Bill. The fallacy is a fallacy no matter who uses it.
 
then the crux of your argument should be the sorry state of Mental health these days, NOT gun ownership. It is dishonest to round about claim that if we just got rid of guns then suicides would cease.


j-mac

There is certainly an issue there, and lack of adequate health care is part of that issue. However, that's another thread. ;)
 
your evasive little game has been seen by many

I have been involved in this issue both as an interested amateur and a well known professional for 35 years. I know all the arguments, facades, evasions and excuses

:lamo :lamo :lamo

I need more coffee. :coffeepap
 
Not a gun hater. I've actually been know to hunt with one. But, hey, don't let a good false sterotype slow you down. :coffeepap

Having a gun or using one does not make you a 2nd amendment proponent nor does it make you a gun lover.
 
You would still have to show it was the only, or the more significant factor. Just because something comes first doesn't mean it is the cause. This is true no matter who tries to skirt it, liberal or conservative. And if you are paying attention, I even used how some tried to make the fallious argument concerning the Brady Bill. The fallacy is a fallacy no matter who uses it.

okay .. thank you..... -chuckles- as I've said I'm new here, and still feeling My way around ... as to who I can have an honest discussion with, and who I should just ignore.
 
okay .. thank you..... -chuckles- as I've said I'm new here, and still feeling My way around ... as to who I can have an honest discussion with, and who I should just ignore.

All's good. And yes, you will find both here. ;)
 
Really? Please tell me what have you hunted, and with what.

Hunted deer in Montana. I lived in Greatfalls. We ate for the year that way. Used my uncles old Carbine. Worked well enough.
 
Don't really remember. It was nearly 30 years ago. Maybe .30.


a .30 carbine?

30CarbAimpoint3.jpg
 
a .30 carbine?

30CarbAimpoint3.jpg

There's more than one. They began as .30 caliber and that is what most were. So, I suspect it is likely his was. But that is a much fancier scope than he had. That's fancy stuff. ;)
 
It's a horrid choice to hunt deer with, as the round is anemic and often wounds instead of kills. I hope he graduated to a more humane rifle for hunting.
 
It's a horrid choice to hunt deer with, as the round is anemic and often wounds instead of kills. I hope he graduated to a more humane rifle for hunting.

Didn't have much trouble. First time out, yes, I did wound a deer and have to track him down. But after that, I got better. Still, when you're young and poor, you borrow.
 
The VPC-OMG you just killed your argument

these are the morons who

1) told the media in 1988 to deliberately confuse the public as to the difference between machine guns and semi autos

2) claimed that centerfire rifles with a scope were "sniper rifles" (in reality any rifle suitable for shooting a deer at 400M is equally useful for shooting a human which is why the military and police use the same rifles that hunters use in many cases)

3) pushed the ban on normal cap magazines and when it passed whined when makers scaled down their pistols to hold only 10 round magazines rather than normal capacity magazines

VPC is a dishonest conspiracy against gun rights

Actually, I see the logic of this one, as it would mitigate the damage caused by those who go off the reservation....

And in other news, the government is now passing the following laws, in order to mitigate damage caused by psychos:

1) It shall be against the law to own a weapon with a caliber greater than .22.

2) Since beer is a major cause of DWI, cans of beer shall not contain more than 11 ounces.

3) Since smoking is dangerous, manufacturers will now be required to make them a silly millimeter shorter.

4) Since knives also kill, it shall now be against the law to manufacture one with a length greater than 3 inches.

5) Since pornography is a blight on our nation, all pictures in playboy shall not be greater than 2 inches by 2 inches (The Tucker Case Law :mrgreen:).

6) Since hardcover books can be used as bludgeons, they are now outlawed. Only paperbacks will be legal.

7) Any paperback book that is more than 250 pages shall be broken up into volumes no larger than 250 pages, in order to reduce their lethality.

8) Since murder by drowning someone in a bathtub sometimes happens, it shall be a crime to fill your bathtub to a depth of greater than 3 inches.

9) Since traffic accidents kill people, it shall be illegal to own a vehicle greater in size than a Radio Flyer toy wagon, and the speed shall be limited to 2 MPH.

10) Since dying of laughter can sometimes happen, Jay Leno is hereby forbidden to use hilarious jokes, which shall be replaced with mildly humorous jokes.

On the other hand, maybe I don't see the logic of this. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
yeah sure. so tell me what advantage does bullseye have over 231. and why would you use 231 instead of bullseye

and (yeah I suppose you can google this) what was the standard IPSC loading for a #68 H&G cast bullet to make "major" with 231

Bullseye is a ball powder if I recollect properly. I've never used it but a friend used to come over and reload with me and he did. I have always used Dupont extruded powders. Who cares? Do you have an encyclopedic knowledge of arcane reloading info? Good for you. My experience is probably more limited than yours. I reload for my personal shotguns and rifles for fun, not a gun obsession. When it gets to be a chore and boring I walk away until next time it calls me or until hunting season. If you have never had a boring moment playing with guns we're probably not on the same wavelength. No doubt you believe in armed civilians walking around in public loaded down with handguns with which to shoot other people?
 
Last edited:
Having a gun or using one does not make you a 2nd amendment proponent nor does it make you a gun lover.

Disagreeing with the present state of gun philosophy and politics in America does not make one a gun hater either.
 
Really? Please tell me what have you hunted, and with what.

This is a bullying question like dove's attack on my post. It does not address the substance of the debate but is a mere assault on the individual making a point. It appears to be typical of the gun lobby and part of the attititude common to gun extremists. This propensity to personal attack is part of the reason why so many American males should not be permitted to carry handguns in public. That's why we hire police.
 
Disagreeing with the present state of gun philosophy and politics in America does not make one a gun hater either.

It however can make you a 2nd amendment opponent when you are trying to restrict the 2nd amendment.
 
This is a bullying question like dove's attack on my post. It does not address the substance of the debate but is a mere assault on the individual making a point. It appears to be typical of the gun lobby and part of the attititude common to gun extremists. This propensity to personal attack is part of the reason why so many American males should not be permitted to carry handguns in public. That's why we hire police.



How can you be sure i am not the police. :ssst:
 
Don't really remember. It was nearly 30 years ago. Maybe .30.

30 years ago? You made it sound like you go hunting every now and then.

"Not a gun hater. I've actually been know to hunt with one. But, hey, don't let a good false sterotype slow you down"
 
Back
Top Bottom