• 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!

Proposal: A Gun in every household

They used to teach firearms in public schools, I'm all for it.

Matter of fact all of our rights should be taught in school.
 
ataraxia said:
The right to arms, like every other right, has limits.
Click to expand...

A Scalian notion only ever brought up by people looking to curtail individual rights. Which is hilarious because most anti-2A types who cite this justification for ingringement, use it to argue AGAINST the very case being made in Heller.

Shall not be infringed and congress shall make no law mean something to some of us.

ataraxia said:
Neither are bump stocks with high capacity magazine clips.
Click to expand...

What you call High capacity (30 roung mag) is actually the STANDARD capacity, but don't let being wrong stop you from trying to unconstitutionally ban things you don't even understand.
 
ataraxia said:
Maybe. But no one needs to have bump stocks and high capacity magazine clips. You have to draw the line somewhere, or we will be talking about a nuclear ordnance for every garage.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the slippery slope argument.

The lib version: loose gun control laws leads to everyone having nukes.
The conservative version: allowing gays to marry leads to legalized pedophilia.

It is ridiculous when either side does it.
 
Better gun education is a great idea but forcing gun ownership on people not properly committed to that ownership or use would be a mistake.
 
Fledermaus said:
High capacity MAGAZINES (always understand what it is you try to ban) have been around about half a century now.
Click to expand...

They've been around longer than that. The French Chauchat light machine gun, using 20 round magazines, was designed in 1907. John Browning received a patent in 1900 for the rifle that became the Remington Model 8, some models of which had 15 and 20 round magazines.
 
Rucker61 said:
They've been around longer than that. The French Chauchat light machine gun, using 20 round magazines, was designed in 1907. John Browning received a patent in 1900 for the rifle that became the Remington Model 8, some models of which had 15 and 20 round magazines.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct. I had forgotten the Model 8.
 
Starvos said:


But this must also be a two-pronged approach. Mandatory rigourous training, saftey courses and strict backround checks must be enforced so we have a responsible well-armed population.
Click to expand...


What does mandatory training have to do with reducing gun crime? Or suicide?

What does harm does mandatory training reduce? Accidents to some extent.

Accidental gun deaths are very low in number in the US. And are not a risk to public safety.
 
HowardBThiname said:
This is the double-edged sword right here.

As long as you can supply something without making the person who receives it feel lesser or entitled, you might have something. To date -- we haven't seen that type of program, although the new "work for Medicaid" program might help some.
Click to expand...

I agree. The opportunities need to be made available for those willing to work for them. I'd advocate things like tax breaks for businesses that set up shop in impoverished areas, and free trades (electrician, plumbing, building etc.) courses/discounted course materials for people in impoverished areas.
 
ataraxia said:
That's not constitutional, even in the opinion of the most conservative members of the Supreme court. The right to arms, like every other right, has limits.
Click to expand...

You are suggesting that if the government chose no to put any restrictions on a right it would be unconstitutional? Just because the govt has the power to regulate something that doesnt mean they are required to do it.

I wasnt suggesting that the right to keep and bear arms was unlimited, I was pointing out that curtailing it beyond other rights is absurd.

The same people who want background checks for all guns to make sure there are only legal gun owners also say its racist to have IDs to vote to ensure there are only legal voters. The same people that think a waiting period for a gun is a prudent safety measure, see a waiting period for abortion as an attack on liberty.

I am simply pointing out people who want to expand the rights the like while curtailing those they dont.
 
Bucky said:
So, if you tink there were less guns and had less access to them, than gun violence would go down?
Click to expand...
Well Bucky could you answer an age old question? What is "gun violence" is it like a violent gun? If so why have I never had one, or anyone that I know of and I have had a lot of guns. But I suspect it's more of a blame game. Blame the object instead of the person, but before blaming the person we blame the way he/she was brought up such as poor or bullied(always a good one) or in general abused and if all else fails drag in race. But above all blame the gun.It was violent.
 
=Starvos;1068082470]Requring citizens to have the knowledge on how to safely handle and use automatic weapons is not an unreasonable demand, nor is it preventing them from having the guns in the first place.
Click to expand...
I know about "automatic weapons" which I think you are confusing with so called "assault weapons" aka AR15s,AK clones and such(semi auto) in other words scccaaarry looking. So yes it is an unreasonable demand. Not everyone wants a class three firearm license or own NFA weapons.
I'm very pro gun myself. In order to have a responsible armed working class, they need to know how to use the bloody things. Its idealistic to suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...
Working class? What about those that lost their jobs do they hand their guns in. You do know what automatic weapons are. Why would the govt. give instructions on how to fire a machine gun?
 
zsu2357 said:
Well Bucky could you answer an age old question? What is "gun violence" is it like a violent gun? If so why have I never had one, or anyone that I know of and I have had a lot of guns. But I suspect it's more of a blame game. Blame the object instead of the person, but before blaming the person we blame the way he/she was brought up such as poor or bullied(always a good one) or in general abused and if all else fails drag in race. But above all blame the gun.It was violent.
Click to expand...

Guns are not inherently evil correct. Money isn't inherently evil either it is neutral yet we have all sorts of regulations on our currency.

Guns need serious regulation, rapidly. You would be shocked at the e-mails I receive about creating your own guns instantly.
 
Nap said:
Very good post up until you blamed pretty much all of societies problems on capitalism.
Click to expand...

Problem isn't capitalism, which is a marvelous engine of production, but imperfect when it comes to distribution. Problem is the belief that capitalism solves everything. Never has. Needs a dollop or 10 of socialism, which of course has the reverse problem.
 
Crovax said:
Yes you are clearly so "pro-gun" that you dont know how ridiculously hard and expensive it is to get an automatic weapon. :roll:
Click to expand...
Yeah I posted something similar. I think he is as anti as the Bucky(well maybe not AS much) OR if he is pro gun it's more I got my wabbit hunting shotgun.
 
zsu2357 said:
Yeah I posted something similar. I think he is as anti as the Bucky(well maybe not AS much) OR if he is pro gun it's more I got my wabbit hunting shotgun.
Click to expand...

No, dude's a Marxist. He believes in people owning firearms so the bourgeoisie doesn't have a monopoly on violence. His reasoning is similar to the US's founding fathers, but with a different outcome in mind.
 
Rucker61 said:
What is the purpose of this training? Like civics, would it be taught in schools at no cost to the citizen?
Click to expand...
Once upon a time it was if you wanted. But I think they left the automatic weapons out though.
 
zsu2357 said:
Once upon a time it was if you wanted. But I think they left the automatic weapons out though.
Click to expand...

My high school had a .22 rifle range in the basement that the JROTC and shooting team used. We only discussed the use of automatic weapons.
 
ataraxia said:
Maybe. But no one needs to have bump stocks and high capacity magazine clips. You have to draw the line somewhere, or we will be talking about a nuclear ordnance for every garage.
Click to expand...
Really how many people even heard of bump stocks (outside of the gun people)? Before the Vegas shooting how many were there? Well I can't find any,but I'm sure some of you anti gun people can though. Gotta love those "high capacity magazine clips" which of course the Vegas shooting highlighted. One guy(they say) and what a dozen or more rifles fitted with bump stocks? AND more rifles on top of that? OKAY,YEAH,SURE.
 
ataraxia said:
Neither are bump stocks with high capacity magazine clips.
Click to expand...
Got lots of your "high capacity magazine clips."Actually standard magazines. Don't need no bump stock. I can fire my semi auto from my shoulder and make it look impressive even though it's a monumental waste of ammo.
 
ataraxia said:
Maybe. But no one needs to have bump stocks and high capacity magazine clips. You have to draw the line somewhere, or we will be talking about a nuclear ordnance for every garage.
Click to expand...
IF you get your " nuclear ordnance" let me know so I can move far away in case your nearby.
 
Nap said:
True, but those same issues would exist in any economic system.
Click to expand...

If you design a boat out of toilet paper, it will take on too much water.

You could claim that the same problem affects any other design, but you'd be wrong. Capitalism is literally a "close your eyes and let god sort it out" economic system, Adam Smith himself knew the ideal "free market" could never exist and that the market would need help from government.
 
iguanaman said:
I think we should graft a gun onto every child's hand at 13 so they will never be without it... :2razz:
Click to expand...

I remember 20 years or so when I was driving through Cincinnati and heard a local radio host state that every American should be given a gun with they must carry with them at all times and there would be one penalty for the misuse of that same gun - you would be executed with it.

Now I thought the guy was just being the usual talk radio shock jock trying to motive calls on an otherwise slow day and it was not to be taken seriously by anybody with even half a functioning brain .

20 years passes and that guy was a prophet.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
Ah yes, the slippery slope argument.

The lib version: loose gun control laws leads to everyone having nukes.
The conservative version: allowing gays to marry leads to legalized pedophilia.

It is ridiculous when either side does it.
Click to expand...

Only if you're dishonest or unaware of the arguments that nukes are brought in against.

2a supporters focus on the "shall not be infringed" portion to claim that absolutely no restriction on anything related to guns can possibly be constitutional. This is ridiculously stupid and easily debunked by considering larger arms like grenade launchers, cruise missiles, or nukes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom