• 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!

Because Outlaws Don't Obey Laws

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Why gun control cannot work: I’m not sure why the left can’t understand this. The more gun control you pass, the fewer law abiding people able to defend themselves. The criminals? They’ll be armed.

The only thing that will reduce the risk of gun crime to the extent that progressives want is to amend the constitution to make it possible for the government to confiscate all guns and do this by going into people's homes and other private spaces to find the guns and remove them.

Confiscation of guns will greatly reduce the most common forms of gun crime and death -- suicides, gang violence, family and acquaintance conflict. Big events like the mass murder in Las Vegas will still take place because people with the kind of determination shown by Stephen Paddock will find ways to get the guns. It's illegal for people to possess explosives, but terrorists still find ways to get them. It's the same with automatic weapons.
 
The only thing that will reduce the risk of gun crime to the extent that progressives want is to amend the constitution to make it possible for the government to confiscate all guns and do this by going into people's homes and other private spaces to find the guns and remove them.

Confiscation of guns will greatly reduce the most common forms of gun crime and death -- suicides, gang violence, family and acquaintance conflict. Big events like the mass murder in Las Vegas will still take place because people with the kind of determination shown by Stephen Paddock will find ways to get the guns. It's illegal for people to possess explosives, but terrorists still find ways to get them. It's the same with automatic weapons.

Now that would be a rather progressive thing to do. Very Statist, in fact.
 
The only thing that will reduce the risk of gun crime to the extent that progressives want is to amend the constitution to make it possible for the government to confiscate all guns and do this by going into people's homes and other private spaces to find the guns and remove them.

Confiscation of guns will greatly reduce the most common forms of gun crime and death -- suicides, gang violence, family and acquaintance conflict. Big events like the mass murder in Las Vegas will still take place because people with the kind of determination shown by Stephen Paddock will find ways to get the guns. It's illegal for people to possess explosives, but terrorists still find ways to get them. It's the same with automatic weapons.

It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

Those "gun laws" you refer to include overturning the 2nd Amendment and ignoring the 4th Amendment.
 
Those "gun laws" you refer to include overturning the 2nd Amendment and ignoring the 4th Amendment.

Amendments can be changed or removed with the correct legal process.
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

He didn't say "gun laws", he said, an all out gun ban with doors broken down and guns confiscated from law abiding citizens.
 
Amendments can be changed or removed with the correct legal process.

Find a recent red/blue map of the states. Start counting red states. Stop when you get to 13.
 
He didn't say "gun laws", he said, an all out gun ban with doors broken down and guns confiscated from law abiding citizens.

A gun ban would result from gun laws. Jeez.
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

I mention gun confiscation because it's politically impossible to implement. However, anything short of that will have no significant effect on gun crimes.
 
Ummm, no. It would require a bit more than that. Jeez back atcha.

Care to explain how the government would ban guns without a law?
 
Care to explain how the government would ban guns without a law?

Care to explain how the government would ban guns without a Constitutional amendment?
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

Like Paddock? What was he "like"?

In the old days, gangs used baseball bats, knives and chains to kill each other. Domestic abusers use whatever is handy...usually their appendages.

Gun control/confiscation would only make people who can overwise defend themselves, more unsafe.
 
Care to explain how the government would ban guns without a Constitutional amendment?

Which would be part of the legal process, i.e. law. Jeez.
 
Which would be part of the legal process, i.e. law. Jeez.

Okay, explain to us how that "legal process" would work, exactly. Be detailed and specific.
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

Yep, since prohibition of alcohol worked so well, let's try repealing the 2A to reduce crime.
 
Okay, explain to us how that "legal process" would work, exactly. Be detailed and specific.

Much like the "war on drugs" - lot's more folks in jail and the billion dollar industry completely in the hands of criminals goes on.
 
I mention gun confiscation because it's politically impossible to implement. However, anything short of that will have no significant effect on gun crimes.

I see no evidence for this. The goal is harm reduction not harm elimination and gun control can achieve this
 
The... ...weapons.

This is a truly inane argument.
I am perpetually amazed at its staying power

Pretty sure that no laws reduce instances of crime to zero.
Also pretty sure that laws against crimes exist to reduce the likelihood of someone deciding to engage in criminal activity.


Does anyone actually expect that laws against murder will reduce the murder rate to zero?
Honestly, do you know a single, real, live, adult in charge of their faculties person who believes that laws reduce criminal activity to zero?

Everyone I have ever known expects laws to reduce criminal activity.
I have yet to meet anyone who believes that laws will reduce criminal activity to zero.


That said, a some silly, emotional readers will decide that I am against gun ownership or in favor of gun confiscations or some similar silly ****.
But really all I have said is that the "criminal don't obey laws" argument is monumentally stupid argument.

But, emotionally driven readers should still feel free to jump to and reach untenable, silly conclusions about my stances in re firearms.

have fun



Why laws against murder won't work
BECAUSE OUTLAWS DON’T OBEY LAWS, DUH

Why laws against drugs won't work
BECAUSE OUTLAWS DON’T OBEY LAWS, DUH

Why laws against rape won't work
BECAUSE OUTLAWS DON’T OBEY LAWS, DUH

Why laws against insider trading won't work
BECAUSE OUTLAWS DON’T OBEY LAWS, DUH
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

Do you have evidence that will happen?
 
Like Paddock? What was he "like"?

In the old days, gangs used baseball bats, knives and chains to kill each other. Domestic abusers use whatever is handy...usually their appendages.

Gun control/confiscation would only make people who can overwise defend themselves, more unsafe.
Not sure but I think gun owners just got stereotyped.
 
It would make it harder for people like Paddock to get guns. No law can stop the crime completely.

But thanks for confirming that gun laws would greatly reduce the amount of people killed in gang violence and family conflict - there's hope for you yet.

except that deaths from the civil war that would follow would be far more. and the war on drugs has proven the gangs will still have weapons
 
I see no evidence for this. The goal is harm reduction not harm elimination and gun control can achieve this

the real goal of gun banners is getting rid of the NRA and pro gun voters as a formidable voting block
 
Back
Top Bottom