• 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!

I Used To Think Gun Control Was The Answer

Moderate Right said:
I've already gone down this road with you once before and you have your door shut and the windows closed. No rays of light can get through. I'm not regurgitating the same ole same ole all over again. If you are interested, use the search feature where we debated it before a few months ago.
Click to expand...

I accept your concession
 
apdst said:
Geoist.
Click to expand...

He hasn't said he wants to ban all guns. You keep insisting that he does, but he certainly doesn't and has said so many times.
 
Moderate Right said:
Nothing. A guy who has never laid a finger on his girlfriend has no reason to be suspected of laying a finger on her at a later time and it is unrealistic to assume that someone who has never laid a finger on his girlfriend is buying ammo like there's no tomorrow because he intends on shooting her. The people I am talking about are an OBVIOUS threat to people. Most of these people have already been arrested numerous times.
Click to expand...

Unless, as I said, he's saying he wants to. Funny how you missed that part.
 
Cephus said:
He hasn't said he wants to ban all guns. You keep insisting that he does, but he certainly doesn't and has said so many times.
Click to expand...

But, he wants to ban some guns.
 
apdst said:
But, he wants to ban some guns.
Click to expand...

Anyone that isn't completely insane wants to ban some guns. Nobody needs an RPG. Nobody.
 
Cephus said:
You do know that crime rates are down across the board, right?
Click to expand...

if you mean the Hughes amendment, that's stupid

if you mean the clinton gun ban, the decrease continued after the ban expired.
 
Cephus said:
Anyone that isn't completely insane wants to ban some guns. Nobody needs an RPG. Nobody.
Click to expand...

since when is a rocket propelled grenade a "gun" or a firearm. I don't think ANY firearm should be banned. now stuff that fires an explosive projectile -that's a different issue. those weapons are indiscriminate. If someone is firing at me from a crowded street, I can return fire and hit him without hurting anyone else. If I shoot him with a bazooka or a mortar or a missile, I cannot help but kill others. that is why such weapons are not properly protected by a right that is based on self defense.
 
apdst said:
But, he wants to ban some guns.
Click to expand...

anyone who feels that the way to keep people already banned from owning any firearm is to ban some firearms from being owned by honest people is essentially a gun banner and will generally support more and more bans when the first set fails to decrease crime. its a choice one makes and once you make the choice, supporting the ban of additional firearms is easy to do
 
Cephus said:
Anyone that isn't completely insane wants to ban some guns. Nobody needs an RPG. Nobody.
Click to expand...

Then stop saying no one wants to ban guns, then.

Also, stop saying that a rocket launcher is a gun, because it isn't.
 
apdst said:
Then stop saying no one wants to ban guns, then.

Also, stop saying that a rocket launcher is a gun, because it isn't.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of crazies on the far right who advocate any weapon as a firearm, up to and including nuclear weapons.
 
Cephus said:
There are plenty of crazies on the far right who advocate any weapon as a firearm, up to and including nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...

That's a very poor comparison.
 
Cephus said:
There are plenty of crazies on the far right who advocate any weapon as a firearm, up to and including nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...

You bet there are
 
Cephus said:
There are plenty of crazies on the far right who advocate any weapon as a firearm, up to and including nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...

citation please?
 
apdst said:
That's a very poor comparison.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Because everyone rational agrees that some arms need to be restricted, therefore everyone is in favor of some form of gun control. You're just arbitrarily drawing the line at what you think is acceptable and what is not. You're pointing fingers at people like Donald Sutherland in Invasion of the Body Snatchers like that somehow disproves the point of the other guy. And you're wrong. Try arguing actual points, not pretending that "they're for gun control!" wins you any brownie points.
 
Cephus said:
No, it's not. Because everyone rational agrees that some arms need to be restricted, therefore everyone is in favor of some form of gun control. You're just arbitrarily drawing the line at what you think is acceptable and what is not. You're pointing fingers at people like Donald Sutherland in Invasion of the Body Snatchers like that somehow disproves the point of the other guy. And you're wrong. Try arguing actual points, not pretending that "they're for gun control!" wins you any brownie points.
Click to expand...

A rocket launcher isn't a firearm. The military doesn't even classify a rocket launcher as a "small arm".
 
ultmd said:
It's always telling, the way right wing ideologues "choose" their "facts" and "truths".

Here's the ENTIRE 2nd Amendment for you:

" A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. "

Obviously, "well regulated" and "militia" are "inconvenient" terms for most 2A wingnuts.

And given the fact that we require licenses to own guns RIGHT NOW..........and that machine guns have been severely regulated since the mid 30's........it's obvious to most rational people that the only place where "gun bans aren't constitutional" is in the minds of certain 2A wingnuts and other right wing ideologues.

Of course it's Constitutional to "ban guns to some degree" (i.e. "REGULATE" guns) in this country.
Click to expand...
Well regulated back then meant well functioning and the militia was private citizens.
 
TurtleDude said:
anyone who feels that the way to keep people already banned from owning any firearm is to ban some firearms from being owned by honest people is essentially a gun banner and will generally support more and more bans when the first set fails to decrease crime. its a choice one makes and once you make the choice, supporting the ban of additional firearms is easy to do
Click to expand...

What do honest people need with a weapon of mass carnage?
 
D_NATURED said:
What do honest people need with a weapon of mass carnage?
Click to expand...

well given that term is of dubious merit, humor me and tell me what you define one as.

if civilian police officers have a type of firearm for self defense as second responders to violent criminals than us first responders need them too

mass carnage to me means heavy artillery, bombs, weaponized germs, poison gas, fire bombs, nukes, MOABS, heavy mortars or automatic canon like the 20MM gatling guns on attack aircraft or boats.
 
TurtleDude said:
well given that term is of dubious merit, humor me and tell me what you define one as.

if civilian police officers have a type of firearm for self defense as second responders to violent criminals than us first responders need them too

mass carnage to me means heavy artillery, bombs, weaponized germs, poison gas, fire bombs, nukes, MOABS, heavy mortars or automatic canon like the 20MM gatling guns on attack aircraft or boats.
Click to expand...

Would you describe what happened in Vegas as mass carnage? I would.
 
D_NATURED said:
Would you describe what happened in Vegas as mass carnage? I would.
Click to expand...

same when a guy burned up a night club with a gallon of gas and killed about the same. but he didn't do that with one rifle but a bunch. Using your stupid definition the 10 shot handgun the VT shooter used would be one too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom