• 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!

Dangerous People Shouldn't Be Allowed To Run Around Loose (gun control)

tres borrachos said:
Can you please let me know where in the story I can find the connection to "The left stupidly want to let people like this roam around freely "?
Click to expand...

LOL. All you have to do is read this thread and about a million other threads in this forum.
 
tres borrachos said:
I missed it in this thread. Who on the left wants career criminals to roam around freely? Poster name?
Click to expand...

Me. That's what I want. I love career criminals, especially when they rob me and take all of my stuff. So awesome.
 
TheGoverness said:
Oh, yes. Regular career criminals get my Cash on hand. Lesbian career criminals get my bank account information. :2razz:
Click to expand...

I always suspected that. If I ever decide to become a lesbian, I want your PIN and your ATM card, too.
 
rocket88 said:
Then why did you put gun control in the title of the thread?

A good background check would keep such a person from owning a gun. That makes him much less dangerous.
Click to expand...

He's a criminal. If he did have a gun, what makes you think it was acquired legally? I would submit he couldn't pass a background check and any gun he had was probably acquired illegally, although he could have purchased it on the street. And just to be clear, I'm for robust background checks, whether that be at a gun store or at gun shows. As far as private sales are concerned, to be honest, I'm not sure.
 
jimbo said:
No one owning a gun for the purpose of committing a crime is legally owning a gun.

Legally possessed guns are not the problem.
Click to expand...

No they're not. The problem is allowing dangerous people to own them.
 
Elroy Bean said:
He's a criminal. If he did have a gun, what makes you think it was acquired legally? I would submit he couldn't pass a background check and any gun he had was probably acquired illegally, although he could have purchased it on the street. And just to be clear, I'm for robust background checks, whether that be at a gun store or at gun shows. As far as private sales are concerned, to be honest, I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

One thing we're learning is that the background checks often don't include certain things because they weren't properly recorded. That is a problem to be solved and I'm not convinced that more legislation would fix it.
 
Moderate Right said:
Yet, another example of an obviously dangerous person who shouldn't be running around loose. The left stupidly want to let people like this roam around freely and try keeping guns out of their hands. It's not about guns! We need to keep dangerous people off the streets and not restrict the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens. When are we ever going to get smart and keep these people locked up? Why did this senior have to go through this?

Elderly woman outsmarts Florida man who tried to kidnap her | Miami Herald
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the left? What is your solution? Lock more people up? What is it with many of you on the right and your hard on for throwing everybody in jail. Land of the free my ass. Your answer to everything is lock people up. Ironic, talk about rights on one hand, then talk about taking rights away from people on the other hand.

What, anybody who is a bit weird or strange needs to be locked up? Under what legal grounds? Who gets to determine that? Oh, you don't like your neighbor so you can claim they are crazy and get them locked up? Hey, we should round up the witches and burn them at the stake

Anyway, I'm not expecting an answer, your posts are all intentionally stupid and for trolling purposes. Your goal has to be to make the right look stupid, no way anybody could seriously post the nonsense you do and actually believe it
 
ttwtt78640 said:
This is Florida where Cruz was never even arrested - just exposed to rotating public schools for his (violent?) behavior.
Click to expand...

Makes the point that better identification and enforcement to begin with would prevent alot of tragedy.

As has been said many times, esp. since that POS shot up an entire church in TX that slipped thru a couple of different legal cracks...we need to better enforce what we already have before passing legislation that still wont work if the holes arent shored up.
 
TheGoverness said:
Me. That's what I want. I love career criminals, especially when they rob me and take all of my stuff. So awesome.
Click to expand...

The sad thing is...if he said he had a gun, had her cornered there at her car...and then she shot him...cuz granny coulda been packing...she'd be under a microscope to make sure that it was actually self-defense. :cool:

And it would very possibly come down to disparity of force at her age (and gender), rather than a straightforward self-defense shooting.

I do agree there should be police scrutiny into any shooting but this stuff still runs citizens thru very expensive hoops when defending themselves.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
What does this have to do with the left? What is your solution? Lock more people up? What is it with many of you on the right and your hard on for throwing everybody in jail. Land of the free my ass. Your answer to everything is lock people up. Ironic, talk about rights on one hand, then talk about taking rights away from people on the other hand.

What, anybody who is a bit weird or strange needs to be locked up? Under what legal grounds? Who gets to determine that? Oh, you don't like your neighbor so you can claim they are crazy and get them locked up? Hey, we should round up the witches and burn them at the stake

Anyway, I'm not expecting an answer, your posts are all intentionally stupid and for trolling purposes. Your goal has to be to make the right look stupid, no way anybody could seriously post the nonsense you do and actually believe it
Click to expand...

Don't have to lock MORE people up. Just keep the ones who should be locked up, locked up. This guy was arrested more than 10 times.
 
Moderate Right said:
The guy had been arrested over ten times on drug and theft charges. I am for 3 or 5 strikes and you're out. I'm not against mandatory rehab for drug offenders as long as they are kept off the streets until their drug habit has been overcome and I don't give a damn how long they have to be forcibly confined in order to achieve that. If they can't get off the stuff then they should never be let back out.
Click to expand...



Your reply does not address you not having produced any factual evidence to support the claims you made as I pointed out in my prior post. Now you recommend a “3 or 5 strikes and you're out” approach, which you can’t produce any evidence has worked. You also recommend that drug offenders be confined and off the streets, which means some form of jail, a rather draconian solution for which you have no supporting evidence as to the need for it, let alone whether it would work or not. Violent offenders are more likely to be under the influence of alcohol only than drugs only.

As usual, you can’t disprove the refutation of your lacking facts to support your initial claim and instead follow-up with more unsupported belief. What you don’t give a damn about, are the facts.
 
rocket88 said:
Yes it is, and background checks are part of addressing just that.
Click to expand...

We have background checks. The problem in Florida was the garbage in garbage out nature of the system. Students were not arrested so as to keep the arrest numbers down.

At any rate, Bcg do not check guns. Bcg check people.

Guns are not the problem.
 
Moderate Right said:
Yet, another example of an obviously dangerous person who shouldn't be running around loose. The left stupidly want to let people like this roam around freely and try keeping guns out of their hands. It's not about guns! We need to keep dangerous people off the streets and not restrict the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens. When are we ever going to get smart and keep these people locked up? Why did this senior have to go through this?

Elderly woman outsmarts Florida man who tried to kidnap her | Miami Herald
Click to expand...

Do you know anything about the law and putting people "away" You have to have tow things, to be mentally ill and to be a danger to yourself or others. the second part requires an overt act. Meaning, Because we are a free people, you can't jail someone, even in mental institution with just a they may be a danger to themselves or others, yoou have to concrete proof. I thought the NRA was all for getting guns in the hands of those who are mentally ill. They got Trump to revoke Obama's executive order that kept the guns out of the hands of over 70 thousand mentally ill people.
 
bluesmoke said:
Your reply does not address you not having produced any factual evidence to support the claims you made as I pointed out in my prior post. Now you recommend a “3 or 5 strikes and you're out” approach, which you can’t produce any evidence has worked. You also recommend that drug offenders be confined and off the streets, which means some form of jail, a rather draconian solution for which you have no supporting evidence as to the need for it, let alone whether it would work or not. Violent offenders are more likely to be under the influence of alcohol only than drugs only.

As usual, you can’t disprove the refutation of your lacking facts to support your initial claim and instead follow-up with more unsupported belief. What you don’t give a damn about, are the facts.
Click to expand...

Our current solution to druggies isn't working. They need money to buy drugs and they almost always get it through some type of crime, of which ordinary people are usually the victims. On top of that, we give these people free needles and now they want family members to stock antidote drugs to help the druggie in case of overdose. What's wrong with this picture? But, libbies see nothing wrong with this picture. Meanwhile, this elderly lady had to put up with this crap when she didn't have to. Druggies need to be forcibly confined to a rehab facility and kept there until they are not only clean but expected to stay clean after release. If that expectation is not there, then they stay confined. Liberals don't want to help druggies. In fact, they want druggies enabled, along with the crime that goes along with it. Where is liberal compassion to actually cure these druggies of their drug habit?
 
Last edited:
independentusa said:
Do you know anything about the law and putting people "away" You have to have tow things, to be mentally ill and to be a danger to yourself or others. the second part requires an overt act. Meaning, Because we are a free people, you can't jail someone, even in mental institution with just a they may be a danger to themselves or others, yoou have to concrete proof. I thought the NRA was all for getting guns in the hands of those who are mentally ill. They got Trump to revoke Obama's executive order that kept the guns out of the hands of over 70 thousand mentally ill people.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that the laws suck and need total revamping. And, we need to get rid of liberal judges who keep on letting these people out again and again or giving them light sentences. Obviously dangerous people should be locked up for good so the rest of us can live in peace. This elderly person should not have to have gone through this. It is ridiculous for anyone to be arrested more than five times. If people prove that their only goal in life is to be a career criminal then we should take their careers away and keep them locked up for good so the rest of us can live in peace.
 
jimbo said:
We have background checks. The problem in Florida was the garbage in garbage out nature of the system. Students were not arrested so as to keep the arrest numbers down.

At any rate, Bcg do not check guns. Bcg check people.

Guns are not the problem.
Click to expand...

No they're not. You're arguing against an argument I haven't made.
 
Moderate Right said:
Our current solution to druggies isn't working. They need money to buy drugs and they almost always get it through some type of crime, of which ordinary people are usually the victims. On top of that, we give these people free needles and now they want family members to stock antidote drugs to help the druggie in case of overdose. What's wrong with this picture? But, libbies see nothing wrong with this picture. Meanwhile, this elderly lady had to put up with this crap when she didn't have to. Druggies need to be forcibly confined to a rehab facility and kept there until they are not only clean but expected to stay clean after release. If that expectation is not there, then they stay confined. Liberals don't want to help druggies. In fact, they want druggies enabled, along with the crime that goes along with it. Where is liberal compassion to actually cure these druggies of their drug habit?
Click to expand...



Yes, our current drug solution isn’t working. The “war on drugs” was a dismal, costly failure. Now, you just want to double-down on proven policy failure and incarcerate everyone with a drug addiction. However you decide to determine what is “drug addiction.”

“almost always get it through some type of crime”

Another ignorant claim. You have no evidence to back-up what you say.

Free needles are to keep users from getting infections and AIDS. Antidotes are to keep users from dying. You, apparently, would rather more people get aids and die of overdose than be saved.

“Liberals don't want to help druggies. In fact, they want druggies enabled, along with the crime that goes along with it.”

More ignorant claims without any factual supporting evidence.

This is your third post batch of claim strike-outs. You keep getting refuted only to come back with more false claims.
 
bluesmoke said:
Yes, our current drug solution isn’t working. The “war on drugs” was a dismal, costly failure. Now, you just want to double-down on proven policy failure and incarcerate everyone with a drug addiction. However you decide to determine what is “drug addiction.”

“almost always get it through some type of crime”

Another ignorant claim. You have no evidence to back-up what you say.

Free needles are to keep users from getting infections and AIDS. Antidotes are to keep users from dying. You, apparently, would rather more people get aids and die of overdose than be saved.

“Liberals don't want to help druggies. In fact, they want druggies enabled, along with the crime that goes along with it.”

More ignorant claims without any factual supporting evidence.

This is your third post batch of claim strike-outs. You keep getting refuted only to come back with more false claims.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely and totally wrong. I want to keep obviously dangerous people off the streets, whether they are druggies or just plain violent criminals. When it comes to drug addicts, I prefer mandatory time in a rehab facility where they are not allowed out until they are proven they have kicked their habit. If they wind up back we keep them in for a longer time before they are let out. None of this crap about a 30 day stay and then weekly classes when they are out. They stay until they are not a druggie anymore. If they just can't kick the habit then we keep them locked up for good either in jail or a permanent rehab facility.
 
Moderate Right said:
That is absolutely and totally wrong. I want to keep obviously dangerous people off the streets, whether they are druggies or just plain violent criminals. When it comes to drug addicts, I prefer mandatory time in a rehab facility where they are not allowed out until they are proven they have kicked their habit. If they wind up back we keep them in for a longer time before they are let out. None of this crap about a 30 day stay and then weekly classes when they are out. They stay until they are not a druggie anymore. If they just can't kick the habit then we keep them locked up for good either in jail or a permanent rehab facility.
Click to expand...

No one will adopt your plan due to the incredible expense involved. That is why it is not happening already
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom